Hi Wolfram,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: lundi 24 mars 2025 10:43
> To: Thierry Bultel <thierry.bultel.yh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: thierry.bultel@xxxxxxxxxxx; linux-renesas-soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Paul Barker <paul.barker.ct@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-serial@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/13] serial: sh-sci: Add support for RZ/T2H SCI
>
>
> > +config SERIAL_RZ_SCI
>
> I think this name is too generic. Most RZ-variants so far do not have this
> SoC. Would 'RZT2H' work or is it too narrow then?
This is too narrow, because for instance the RZ/N2H , which is very similar, has the same SCI
>
> > + SCIx_RZT2H_SCI_REGTYPE,
>
> This name is better.
>
> > struct plat_sci_port {
> > - unsigned int type; /* SCI / SCIF / IRDA / HSCIF */
> > + unsigned int type; /* SCI / SCIF / IRDA / HSCIF /
> RZSCI */
>
> "RZT2" in the comment as well.
>
> > +/* SH-SCI */
> > +#define PORT_RZSCI 124
> > +
> > /* Generic type identifier for ports which type is not important to
> userspace. */
> > #define PORT_GENERIC (-1)
>
> Does userspace need to know this port? Can't we use PORT_GENERIC?
Userspace unlikely needs it. But unfortunately, the port type needs to be checked at a number (5) of places in the driver, so the definition is needed.
Thierry
