linux-kernel - Re: questions about 8250 uart support for adhoc boards

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 27 Feb 2007 15:40:57 -0500
From:	Rob Prowel <prowel@...hera.com>
To:	Stuart MacDonald <stuartm@...necttech.com>
CC:	'Russell King' <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: questions about 8250 uart support for adhoc boards

Stuart MacDonald wrote:
> Would it be more intuitive to give ports the default uartclk of
> 1843200 at init time? That would avoid this issue, but would make the
> baud rates come out wrong on hardware with a non-standard clock, if a
> base baud wasn't specified.
>
>   

I prefer the option to specify the base baud rate in setserial from a 
startup script.  Having the additional ports at BAUD 0 (unusable) until 
some explicit action is taken strikes me as a safer option, provided 
this gets properly documented in the kernel Documentation directory and 
in Linux HOWTO docs.

-Rob Prowel




-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/