linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] LinuxPPS: Pulse per Second support for Linux

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]

Message-Id: <1178140014.7338.12.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Wed, 02 May 2007 14:06:53 -0700
From:	john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
To:	Rodolfo Giometti <giometti@...eenne.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxpps@...enneenne.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] LinuxPPS: Pulse per Second support for Linux

On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 21:33 +0200, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
> Pulse per Second (PPS) support for Linux.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rodolfo Giometti <giometti@...eenne.com>
> 
> ---
> 
> Here my last release of PPS support for Linux.
> 
> The difference against my last patch is about all userland specific
> code (timepps.h) which has been removed, I hope now you can consider
> adding it into kernel source tree!
> 
> Please, let me know if I still should fix something else.

Please inline your patch, rather then attaching them. It makes it very
difficult to discuss when it is attached.


> diff --git a/drivers/pps/clients/ktimer.c b/drivers/pps/clients/ktimer.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..7514389
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/pps/clients/ktimer.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
> +/*
> + * ktimer.c -- kernel timer test client
> + *

Could you use a better name, like pps_ktimer_test.c, so it is less generic?

Same goes for your kabi.c and sysfs.c files.


> diff --git a/drivers/serial/8250.c b/drivers/serial/8250.c
> index 98ec861..543c7cb 100644
> --- a/drivers/serial/8250.c
> +++ b/drivers/serial/8250.c
> @@ -2004,6 +2004,8 @@ serial8250_set_termios(struct uart_port *port, struct ktermios *termios,
>  		up->ier |= UART_IER_MSI;
>  	if (up->capabilities & UART_CAP_UUE)
>  		up->ier |= UART_IER_UUE | UART_IER_RTOIE;
> +	if (up->port.flags & UPF_HARDPPS_CD)
> +		up->ier |= UART_IER_MSI;	/* enable interrupts */
> 

This isn't covered by a #ifdef, so is this always safe? Should it be in
a separate patch?

Unfortunately I don't have any hardware to play with this, but I'd
suggest you send this to Andrew Morton for inclusion into his tree for
testing.

thanks
-john

-
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/