Message ID | 8B957E110B62714A84290A01A597805F05D2AE44@Exchange.discretix.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Superseded |
Headers | show |
On Thursday 19 November 2009, Alon Ziv wrote: > Is the following better? > > --- > [PATCH] Xilinx 16550 UART is actually 16550A-compatible > Yes, that's better because it's guaranteed not to break any other system, while fixing yours. I'd still add support for the compatible="ns16550a" property so that we do the right thing for future systems. Arnd <><
diff --git a/drivers/serial/of_serial.c b/drivers/serial/of_serial.c index 02406ba..40bf8f4 100644 --- a/drivers/serial/of_serial.c +++ b/drivers/serial/of_serial.c @@ -161,6 +161,7 @@ static int of_platform_serial_remove(struct of_device *ofdev) static struct of_device_id __devinitdata of_platform_serial_table[] = { { .type = "serial", .compatible = "ns8250", .data = (void *)PORT_8250, }, { .type = "serial", .compatible = "ns16450", .data = (void *)PORT_16450, }, + { .type = "serial", .compatible = "xlnx,xps-uart16550-2.00.b",