| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 12:15:19 +0100 From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> To: Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH][SERIAL] Drop probe_baud() and default to "9600n8" On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:06:26 +0200 Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl> wrote: > The early console kernel parameters (i.e. "console=uart[...]" and > "earlycon=uart[...]" allow to omit the baud/parity/bits option. If that > option is not provided probe_baud() is used to determine the baud rate > to be used by that early console. That depends a lot on the system. > I noticed that probe_baud() produced useless and/or unpredictable > results on the few machines I tested the early console parameters (e.g. > 1355 or 1200 and 115200 alternating). My guess is that this is because Depends on what the firmware has done. When the firmware has set the port up as is common in embedded then it is a very useful option to continue with the rates currently in use. > probe_baud() and simply use "9600n8" as (safe) defaults for > baud/parity/bits. I don't plan to apply this change. If you can figure out a reliable way to decide a port is uninitialised and default to 9600 in that case then that would be interesting. Alan -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists