Hi Simon
On 07/31/2018 01:52 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Patrice,
>
> On 30 July 2018 at 09:23, Patrice Chotard <patrice.chot...@st.com> wrote:
>> From: Patrick Delaunay <patrick.delau...@st.com>
>>
>> Replace setparity by more generic setconfig ops
>> to allow uart parity, bits word length and stop bits
>> number change.
>>
>> Adds SERIAL_GET_PARITY/BITS/STOP macros.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Patrick Delaunay <patrick.delau...@st.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Patrice Chotard <patrice.chot...@st.com>
>> ---
>>
>> drivers/serial/serial-uclass.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
>> include/serial.h | 42
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>> 2 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/serial/serial-uclass.c b/drivers/serial/serial-uclass.c
>> index 321d23ee93bf..9f523751ce17 100644
>> --- a/drivers/serial/serial-uclass.c
>> +++ b/drivers/serial/serial-uclass.c
>> @@ -287,6 +287,18 @@ void serial_setbrg(void)
>> ops->setbrg(gd->cur_serial_dev, gd->baudrate);
>> }
>>
>> +void serial_setconfig(u8 config)
>> +{
>> + struct dm_serial_ops *ops;
>> +
>> + if (!gd->cur_serial_dev)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + ops = serial_get_ops(gd->cur_serial_dev);
>> + if (ops->setconfig)
>> + ops->setconfig(gd->cur_serial_dev, config);
>> +}
>> +
>> void serial_stdio_init(void)
>> {
>> }
>> @@ -398,6 +410,8 @@ static int serial_post_probe(struct udevice *dev)
>> ops->pending += gd->reloc_off;
>> if (ops->clear)
>> ops->clear += gd->reloc_off;
>> + if (ops->setconfig)
>> + ops->setconfig += gd->reloc_off;
>> #if CONFIG_POST & CONFIG_SYS_POST_UART
>> if (ops->loop)
>> ops->loop += gd->reloc_off
>> diff --git a/include/serial.h b/include/serial.h
>> index b9ef6d91c9c5..61c1362e9e32 100644
>> --- a/include/serial.h
>> +++ b/include/serial.h
>> @@ -73,6 +73,39 @@ enum serial_par {
>> SERIAL_PAR_EVEN
>> };
>>
>> +#define SERIAL_PAR_MASK 0x03
>> +#define SERIAL_PAR_SHIFT 0
>> +#define SERIAL_GET_PARITY(config) \
>> + ((config & SERIAL_PAR_MASK) >> SERIAL_PAR_SHIFT)
>> +
>> +enum serial_bits {
>> + SERIAL_5_BITS,
>> + SERIAL_6_BITS,
>> + SERIAL_7_BITS,
>> + SERIAL_8_BITS
>> +};
>> +
>> +#define SERIAL_BITS_MASK 0x0C
>> +#define SERIAL_BITS_SHIFT 2
>
> For consistency:
>
> #define SERIAL_BITS_SHIFT 2
> #define SERIAL_BITS_MASK (0x3 << SERIAL_BITS_SHIFT)
Ok
>
>> +#define SERIAL_GET_BITS(config) \
>> + ((config & SERIAL_BITS_MASK) >> SERIAL_BITS_SHIFT)
>> +
>> +enum serial_stop {
>> + SERIAL_HALF_STOP, /* 0.5 stop bit */
>> + SERIAL_ONE_STOP, /* 1 stop bit */
>> + SERIAL_ONE_HALF_STOP, /* 1.5 stop bit */
>> + SERIAL_TWO_STOP /* 2 stop bit */
>> +};
>> +
>> +#define SERIAL_STOP_MASK 0x30
>> +#define SERIAL_STOP_SHIFT 4
>
> same here
ok
>
>> +#define SERIAL_GET_STOP(config) \
>> + ((config & SERIAL_STOP_MASK) >> SERIAL_STOP_SHIFT)
>> +
>> +#define SERIAL_DEFAULT_CONFIG SERIAL_PAR_NONE << SERIAL_PAR_SHIFT | \
>> + SERIAL_8_BITS << SERIAL_BITS_SHIFT | \
>> + SERIAL_ONE_STOP << SERIAL_STOP_SHIFT
>> +
>> /**
>> * struct struct dm_serial_ops - Driver model serial operations
>> *
>> @@ -150,15 +183,18 @@ struct dm_serial_ops {
>> int (*loop)(struct udevice *dev, int on);
>> #endif
>> /**
>> - * setparity() - Set up the parity
>> + * setconfig() - Set up the uart configuration
>> + * (parity, 5/6/7/8 bits word length, stop bits)
>> *
>> - * Set up a new parity for this device.
>> + * Set up a new config for this device.
>> *
>> * @dev: Device pointer
>> * @parity: parity to use
>> + * @bits: bits number to use
>> + * @stop: stop bits number to use
>> * @return 0 if OK, -ve on error
>> */
>> - int (*setparity)(struct udevice *dev, enum serial_par parity);
>> + int (*setconfig)(struct udevice *dev, u8 serial_config);
>
> Please make this uint instead of u8. There is no point in using u8
> since the compiler will use a register anyway. It can only make code
> size worse, if the compile add masking, etc.
ok
>
>> };
>>
>> /**
>> --
>> 1.9.1
>>
>
> Also you need a serial_setconfig() function call in the uclass so
> people can call it.
I already add serial_setconfig() function call in serial-uclass at the
beginning of this patch ;-)
>
> Perhaps that could have separate parameters for each setting, so that
> the caller does not have to make up a mask? I'm not sure if that is
> better or not.
Don't know what is better, currently only STM32 platforms will use it,
internally we already use this API.
>
> Also we need to call this from sandbox code for testing purposes,
Ok i will add a test for this.
Thanks
Patrice
>
> Regards,
> Simon
>
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
