MXS getting AUART to work with DT.

Hi,

I am testing my mx28 hardware with arm-soc/for-next branch. I have made ?additions shown below to my dt file.

What I see is only ttyAPP0 device gets created but not the ttyAPP1, do folks who know DT much better than I, see any issues with this DT definition below?

Hi Subodh,

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Subodh Nijsure <[email protected]>

Quoted 8 lines

Hi,

I am testing my mx28 hardware with arm-soc/for-next branch. I have made
additions shown below to my dt file.

What I see is only ttyAPP0 device gets created but not the ttyAPP1, do folks who know DT much better than I, see any issues with this DT definition below?

I just enabled CONFIG_SERIAL_MXS_AUART and booted my mx28evk (non-DT case) that registers
auart0 and auart2, but I don't see any ttyAPPx node.

Is there anything I am missing?

I would like to get ttyAPP0/2 working first on non-DT case.

Thanks,

Fabio Estevam

I think the kernel for non-DT case is already FUBAR ... just do a simple DT conversion :-(

Quoted 2 lines · Marek Vasut

I think the kernel for non-DT case is already FUBAR ... just do a simple DT conversion :-(

So does it mean mxs-auart has never been used?

Quoted 5 lines · Marek Vasut

Quoted 2 lines

I think the kernel for non-DT case is already FUBAR ... just do a simple DT conversion :-(

So does it mean mxs-auart has never been used?

Ok, just tested a 3.4.2 (non-DT kernel) and I see:

[    0.570000] mxs-auart.0: ttyAPP0 at MMIO 0x8006a000 (irq = 112) is
a mxs-auart.0
[    0.580000] mxs-auart mxs-auart.0: Found APPUART 3.1.0
[    0.590000] mxs-auart.3: ttyAPP3 at MMIO 0x80070000 (irq = 115) is
a mxs-auart.3
[    0.600000] mxs-auart mxs-auart.3: Found APPUART 3.1.0

,so it means that something broke mxs-auart on 3.5-rc.

Will look more on this tomorrow.

Hi,

I am testing my mx28 hardware with arm-soc/for-next branch. I have made additions shown below to my dt file.

What I see is only ttyAPP0 device gets created but not the ttyAPP1, do folks who know DT much better than I, see any issues with this DT definition below?

auart0_pins_a: auart0 at 0 {
         reg = <0>;
         fsl,pinmux-ids = <0x3000 0x3010 0x3020 0x3030>;
         fsl,drive-strength = <0>;
         fsl,voltage = <1>;
         fsl,pull-up = <0>;
};
auart1_pins_a: auart1 at 0 {
         reg = <0>;
         fsl,pinmux-ids = <0x3040 0x3050>;
         fsl,drive-strength = <0>;
         fsl,voltage = <1>;
         fsl,pull-up = <0>;
};
auart0: serial at 8006a000 {
          pinctrl-names = "default";
          pinctrl-0 = <&auart0_pins_a>;
          status = "okay";
};
auart1: serial at 8006c000 {
           pinctrl-names = "default";
           pinctrl-0 = <&auart1_pins_a>;
           status = "okay";

};

-Subodh

Hi,

I am testing my mx28 hardware with arm-soc/for-next branch. I have made ?additions shown below to my dt file.

What I see is only ttyAPP0 device gets created but not the ttyAPP1, do folks who know DT much better than I, see any issues with this DT definition below?

Quoted 8 lines · Subodh Nijsure

Hi,

I am testing my mx28 hardware with arm-soc/for-next branch. I have made
additions shown below to my dt file.

What I see is only ttyAPP0 device gets created but not the ttyAPP1, do folks who know DT much better than I, see any issues with this DT definition below?

Would something like the patch below be needed?

---
  arch/arm/boot/dts/imx28.dtsi   |    5 +++++
  drivers/tty/serial/mxs-auart.c |    9 +++++++++
  2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

arch/arm/boot/dts/imx28.dtsi +5 -0

index 4634cb8..d524377 100644
@@ -404,30 +404,35 @@
  			};
 
  			auart0: serial at 8006a000 {
+				compatible = "fsl,mxs-auart";
  				reg =<0x8006a000 0x2000>;
  				interrupts =<112 70 71>;
  				status = "disabled";
  			};
 
  			auart1: serial at 8006c000 {
+				compatible = "fsl,mxs-auart";
  				reg =<0x8006c000 0x2000>;
  				interrupts =<113 72 73>;
  				status = "disabled";
  			};
 
  			auart2: serial at 8006e000 {
+				compatible = "fsl,mxs-auart";
  				reg =<0x8006e000 0x2000>;
  				interrupts =<114 74 75>;
  				status = "disabled";
  			};
 
  			auart3: serial at 80070000 {
+				compatible = "fsl,mxs-auart";
  				reg =<0x80070000 0x2000>;
  				interrupts =<115 76 77>;
  				status = "disabled";
  			};
 
  			auart4: serial at 80072000 {
+				compatible = "fsl,mxs-auart";
  				reg =<0x80072000 0x2000>;
  				interrupts =<116 78 79>;
  				status = "disabled";

drivers/tty/serial/mxs-auart.c +7 -0

index ec56d83..6540f28 100644
@@ -33,6 +33,8 @@
  #include<linux/delay.h>
  #include<linux/io.h>
  #include<linux/pinctrl/consumer.h>
+#include<linux/of.h>
+#include<linux/of_address.h>
 
  #include<asm/cacheflush.h>
 

@@ -769,12 +771,19 @@ static int __devexit mxs_auart_remove(struct
 platform_device *pdev)
  	return 0;
  }
 
+static struct of_device_id mxs_auart_dt_ids[] = {
+	{.compatible = "fsl,mxs-auart", },
+	{ /* sentinel */ }
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, mxs_auart_of_match);

With this change you will only see AUART0 being created all subsequent attempts fail. ?I think we need to have dt specific probe, my colleague Matt Burtch has implemented that dt specific probe for AUART will request him to send his diff tomorrow AM.

I think something is broken in 3.5 as far as I can tell AUART goes it had worked for me in 3.4, I am novice at device-tree and was not sure if its because of DT or something else.

With this change you will only see AUART0 being created all subsequent attempts fail. I think we need to have dt specific probe, my colleague Matt Burtch has implemented that dt specific probe for AUART will request him to send his diff tomorrow AM.

I think something is broken in 3.5 as far as I can tell AUART goes it had worked for me in 3.4, I am novice at device-tree and was not sure if its because of DT or something else.

Here is the patch I put together to get the AUART recognized with the dt. ?I'm pretty new to dt development, so this was a quick first pass. I'm sure there are more proper ways to get the device id and pass literals between the dt and probe function...but this works for now.