First of all these were inverted: "bridge=" caused the port coordinates
to be established, while "port=" controlled the bridge coordinates. And
then the error messages being identical also wasn't helpful. While
correcting this also move both case blocks close together.
Fixes: 97fd49a7e074 ("ns16550: add support for UART parameters to be specifed
with name-value pairs")
Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>
---
pci_serial_early_init() only dealing with I/O port variants is also
bogus, but that's a separate topic (which arguably would better be taken
care of by someone actually in the position of testing it). Additionally
I think it would be a good idea if the function left the bridge windows
alone if they're already configured suitably (perhaps with a wider
range).
_ns16550_resume() also doesn't care about configuring the bridge
correctly.
It further looks to be a shortcoming that pci_uart_config() doesn't
determine the bridge behind which the selected device may be located
(let alone a hierarchy of bridges).
--- a/xen/drivers/char/ns16550.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/char/ns16550.c
@@ -1631,13 +1631,6 @@ static bool __init parse_namevalue_pairs
break;
#ifdef CONFIG_HAS_PCI
- case bridge_bdf:
- if ( !parse_pci(param_value, NULL, &uart->ps_bdf[0],
- &uart->ps_bdf[1], &uart->ps_bdf[2]) )
- PARSE_ERR_RET("Bad port PCI coordinates\n");
- uart->ps_bdf_enable = true;
- break;
-
case device:
if ( strncmp(param_value, "pci", 3) == 0 )
{
@@ -1652,9 +1645,16 @@ static bool __init parse_namevalue_pairs
break;
case port_bdf:
+ if ( !parse_pci(param_value, NULL, &uart->ps_bdf[0],
+ &uart->ps_bdf[1], &uart->ps_bdf[2]) )
+ PARSE_ERR_RET("Bad port PCI coordinates\n");
+ uart->ps_bdf_enable = true;
+ break;
+
+ case bridge_bdf:
if ( !parse_pci(param_value, NULL, &uart->pb_bdf[0],
&uart->pb_bdf[1], &uart->pb_bdf[2]) )
- PARSE_ERR_RET("Bad port PCI coordinates\n");
+ PARSE_ERR_RET("Bad bridge PCI coordinates\n");
uart->pb_bdf_enable = true;
break;
#endif
