Hi Andy,
On 03/13/2015 11:36 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 4:47 AM, Tim Kryger wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 8:05 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
>>
>>> Ah no - I meant what is their official software workaround for existing
>>> parts with the bug ? Presumably they have an errata d
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 4:47 AM, Tim Kryger wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 8:05 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
>
>> Ah no - I meant what is their official software workaround for existing
>> parts with the bug ? Presumably they have an errata document that
>> discusses this and the correct methods they rec
On 2015/3/10 21:25, Peter Hurley wrote:
> On 03/09/2015 10:47 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
>> The current workaround of clearing fifos and retrying a fixed number
>> of times isn't ideal but I'm not sure what else can be done given the
>> way this hardware works.
>
> But hanging the machine is not an acc
On 03/09/2015 10:47 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
> The current workaround of clearing fifos and retrying a fixed number
> of times isn't ideal but I'm not sure what else can be done given the
> way this hardware works.
But hanging the machine is not an acceptable outcome.
Since the hang stems from the p
On 2015/3/10 10:47, Tim Kryger wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 8:05 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
>
>> Ah no - I meant what is their official software workaround for existing
>> parts with the bug ? Presumably they have an errata document that
>> discusses this and the correct methods they recommend to avo
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 8:05 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
> Ah no - I meant what is their official software workaround for existing
> parts with the bug ? Presumably they have an errata document that
> discusses this and the correct methods they recommend to avoid the
> hang ?
As far as I know, the only a
On Mon, 2015-03-09 at 07:36 -0700, Tim Kryger wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 6:32 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
> >> Maybe the next release of the board we will upgrade the serial block to
> >> the new version.
> >> but the issue is that how we circumvent this problem in kernel?
> >
> > What is the offici
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 6:32 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
>> Maybe the next release of the board we will upgrade the serial block to the
>> new version.
>> but the issue is that how we circumvent this problem in kernel?
>
> What is the official vendor workaround ?
They introduced a UART_16550_COMPATIBLE o
> Maybe the next release of the board we will upgrade the serial block to the
> new version.
> but the issue is that how we circumvent this problem in kernel?
What is the official vendor workaround ?
Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of
On 2015/3/7 11:01, Tim Kryger wrote:
> You only hit the silicon bug if you bombard the uart with characters
> and simultaneously request a baud rate or framing change.
>
> I'm not sure why you would do either to the uart console. Is it
> possible your host machine is doing something weird?
>
> I
You only hit the silicon bug if you bombard the uart with characters
and simultaneously request a baud rate or framing change.
I'm not sure why you would do either to the uart console. Is it
possible your host machine is doing something weird?
If you have the leverage, remind the SoC vendor to u
Hi Zhang,
On 03/06/2015 04:11 AM, Zhang Zhen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm testing 4.0-rc1 kernel on my board with 8250 Designware UART.(ARM
> Cortex-a15 single core).
>
> I found if serial is busy and writes to the LCR failed after tried 1000
> times.
> The kernel will hung up.
Hi,
I'm testing 4.0-rc1 kernel on my board with 8250 Designware UART.(ARM
Cortex-a15 single core).
I found if serial is busy and writes to the LCR failed after tried 1000
times.
The kernel will hung up.
The system boot success after changed from:
95 st
13 matches
Mail list logo
