On Sat, 26 Jul 2014 06:52:36 +0000, Vineet Gupta <vineet.gup...@synopsys.com>
wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Friday 25 July 2014 07:45 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 6:02 AM, Vineet Gupta
> > <vineet.gup...@synopsys.com> wrote:
> >> > Hi Grant,
> >> >
> >> > linux-next has a series for arc_uart (via tty tree) which converts it to
> >> > generic
> >> > earlycon and specifies console via /chosen/stdout-path vs. an explicit
> >> > param in
> >> > /chose/bootargs
> >> >
> >> > 2014-06-24 9da433c0a0b5 ARC: [arcfpga] stdout-path now suffices for
> >> > earlycon/console
> >> >
> >> > This relied on prev commit of yours (from linux next of 20140711), which
> >> > seem to
> >> > have disappeared now.
> >> >
> >> > 2014-03-27 a9296cf2d0b6 of: Create of_console_check() for selecting a
> >> > console
> >> > specified in /chosen
> >> > 2014-03-27 cfa9cacc5dd3 of: Enable console on serial ports specified by
> >> > /chosen/stdout-path
> >> >
> >> > Is there a specific reason for dropping these patches (or perhaps a
> >> > merge to be
> >> > merged). I cherry-picked both but still doesn't work.
> >> >
> >> > Can you please advise next step forward, before I go off debugging with
> >> > those
> >> > patches in.
> > There's an issue that if you have stdout-path and "earlycon" on the
> > command line, the kernel will switch to tty0 and disable the earlycon.
> >
> > This is the "fix", but I don't like adding the DT dependency into generic
> > code:
> >
> > @@ -2382,7 +2386,7 @@ void register_console(struct console *newcon)
> > if (newcon->setup == NULL ||
> > newcon->setup(newcon, NULL) == 0) {
> > newcon->flags |= CON_ENABLED;
> > - if (newcon->device) {
> > + if (newcon->device && !of_stdout) {
> > newcon->flags |= CON_CONSDEV;
> > preferred_console = 0;
> > }
>
> The DT settings relevant for ARC, which enable generic-earlycon and
> console-with-stdout-path are as follows
>
> chosen {
> bootargs = "earlycon";
> stdout-path = &arcuart0;
> };
>
> ....
> arcuart0: serial@c0fc1000 {
> compatible = "snps,arc-uart";
>
> And it works w/o above hunk, provided the 2 patches from Grant exist in
> linux-next
> which they don't at the moment. I'm pretty confused how the hunk above comes
> into
> picture.
>
> And if not then I will have to get the ARC std-out patch reverted in tty-next
> as
> it is broken.
You need to revert it anyway, the dependency chain is broken. Just
because something is in linux-next doesn't mean it will be merged.
Dependencies must always be in the branch to which you commit.
If that doesn't happen (like here) then bisecting is broken and the
dependencies may not actually get merged.
When this happens, what you're supposed to do is tell the maintainers
what commits the patch depends on so that it can be applied to the
correct tree. In this case I could take it through my devicetree branch
that contains the console patches.
If a patch depends on commits in several branches then it is a bit more
complex. What we usually do is create a new branch that merges in each
branch that is depended on, and then apply the commit on top of that.
As for the console patches, I'm only going to be putting them back if I
can devise a good fix for the earlycon duplication issue.
g.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
