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: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 15:16:12 +0000 From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk> To: Rob Prowel <prowel@...hera.com> Cc: Stuart MacDonald <stuartm@...necttech.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: questions about 8250 uart support for adhoc boards On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 03:40:57PM -0500, Rob Prowel wrote: > 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. Is someone going to do that? Who volunteers? -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: - 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