[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <000201c761b1$a281cdf0$2e01a8c0@acksys.local>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 19:43:15 +0100
From: "Tosoni" <jp.tosoni@...sys.fr>
To: "'Krzysztof Halasa'" <khc@...waw.pl>,
"'Carl-Daniel Hailfinger'" <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@....net>
Cc: "'Robin Getz'" <rgetz@...ckfin.uclinux.org>,
"'Oleksiy Kebkal'" <kebkal@...il.com>,
"'Mike Frysinger'" <vapier.adi@...il.com>,
"'Linux Kernel Mailing List'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: should RTS init in serial core be tied to CRTSCTS
Krzysztof Halasa wrote:
> OTOH I wonder what does the device in question require WRT the
> serial port and WRT RTS line in particular.
> I know there are some half-duplex converters which drive RTS only
> while sending and which require CTS to send.
As far as I know in the old times this was the *standard* way to use a modem
(per CCITT V24), and even nowadays many modems can handle this method for
transmit, to stay compatible with the standard.
Think of radio modems. Some are inherently half duplex.
> They are perhaps a bit broken <snip>
No, no, they apply an old standard. Probably they are old as well.
>
> I don't know if one can expect RTS to stay low all the time. Even
> a simple /sbin/setserial from /etc/rc.* would drive it high for
> a moment. I'm afraid the only way which makes sense may be using
> a customized plug.
It's a pity that Linux (or Unixes) never handled RTS this way.
I feel that the /proc or sysfs solutions are the best to alter this well
established default in this driver. It would not break existing installed
hardware.
-
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