Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] serial: mxc: have putc use the TXFIFO

____ From: Fabio Estevam Sent: Monday, November 7, 2022 22:17 To: SCHNEIDER Johannes; TERTYCHNYI Grygorii Cc: Pali Rohár; Fabio Estevam; Tim Harvey; u-boot@lists.denx.de; peng@oss.nxp.com; sba...@denx.de; trini; GEO-CHHER-bsp-development; Peng Fan Subject:

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] serial: mxc: have putc use the TXFIFO

.setbrg = mxc_serial_setbrg, From: Fabio Estevam Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2022 19:37 To: Pali Rohár Cc: Fabio Estevam; SCHNEIDER Johannes; Tim Harvey; u-boot@lists.denx.de; peng@oss.nxp.com; sba...@denx.de; trini; GEO-CHHER-bsp-development; Peng Fan Subject

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] serial: mxc: have putc use the TXFIFO

et drained >before dm_announce gets called. "flushing" shouldn't be an issue, since everything goes through the same set of registers which the imx queues into its fifo... i suspect the rootcause lies someplace else? regards regards ____

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] serial: mxc: have putc use the TXFIFO

rom linux i still would argue to keep the change, since both the linux kernel and $other bootloaders make use of the TXFULL flag kind regard ____ From: Fabio Estevam Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2022 21:39 To: SCHNEIDER Johannes Cc: Pali Rohár; Fabio

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] serial: mxc: have putc use the TXFIFO

Hi the thing with only checking !TXEMPTY is that it limits the fifo to one byte only; and as far as i understood, drivermodel code is supposed to return immediately and not block possibly waiting indefinitely for a hardware/status register to change a colleague pointed out the use of barriers