Uart status interrupts #21632
Uart status interrupts #21632
Conversation
GregAC
requested review from
jdonjdon and
msfschaffner
and removed request for
a team
|
Thanks @GregAC - maybe it makes sense to split out the CIP fixes into a separate PR since those will benefit others as well. |
Yes, maybe worth splitting all commits that apply to more IPs than only |
GregAC
force-pushed
the
uart_status_interrupts
branch
from
2b03607
to
299737e
Compare
|
Latest push addresses CI failures, will address the splitting out/merging with other work of the CIP changes separately. This PR should not be merged until the CIP change work is addressed. |
GregAC
force-pushed
the
uart_status_interrupts
branch
4 times, most recently
from
a11dad5
to
0e18a48
Compare
|
I've spun out the first commit, which is a CIP fix that is useful for status interrupt in general to another PR: #21804 As there's some CI issues with the CW310 tests that may take a little longer to solve it'd be good to get the CIP fix in sooner. |
Fixes lowRISC#16693 Signed-off-by: Greg Chadwick <[email protected]>
The RX and TX watermarks are now status type interrupts. This requires differently handling. The test has also been altered to transfer smaller amounts of data at a time to the UART TX FIFO. This produces multiple rounds of TX watermark followed by more data being sent. Signed-off-by: Greg Chadwick <[email protected]>
RX watermark interrupt is now a status type and needs to be dealt with slightly differently. Signed-off-by: Greg Chadwick <[email protected]>
GregAC
force-pushed
the
uart_status_interrupts
branch
from
0e18a48
to
9ed2e8d
Compare
|
@timothytrippel could you check out the OTTF change? (Final commit) |
OTTF changes LGTM. |
This includes a commit from #21226 which is a cip_lib change required for all status type interrupts. So need to ensure one of the PRs gets rebased if the other has gone in.