linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] atmel_serial: Clean up the code

Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Date:	Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:22:01 +0800
From:	steve birtles <arm_kernel_development@...romark.net.cn>
To:	Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@...el.com>
Cc:	"Remy Bohmer" <linux@...mer.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Andrew Victor <linux@...im.org.za>,
	ARM Linux Mailing List 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] atmel_serial: Clean up the code


On Dec 18, 2007, at 6:33 PM, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:14:42 +0100
> "Remy Bohmer" <linux@...mer.net> wrote:
>
>> Hello Haavard,
>>
>>> Please note that I'm not trying to steal the show here -- I just  
>>> want
>>
>> That did not even come to my mind at all...
>> I am happy with everything that helps making this driver better.
>
> Good :)
>
>> What shall we do first from here, splitup of the interrupt  
>> handler? Or
>> DMA patch?
>


Is there any change can we clean this up?
  /*
   * We wrap our port structure around the generic uart_port.
@@ -142,8 +146,8 @@ static void atmel_set_mctrl(struct uart_port  
*port, u_int mctrl)
  #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_AT91RM9200
  	if (cpu_is_at91rm9200()) {
  		/*
-		 * AT91RM9200 Errata #39: RTS0 is not internally connected to PA21.
-		 *  We need to drive the pin manually.
+		 * AT91RM9200 Errata #39: RTS0 is not internally connected
+		 * to PA21. We need to drive the pin manually.
  		 */
  		if (port->mapbase == AT91RM9200_BASE_US0) {
  			if (mctrl & TIOCM_RTS)
@@ -228,7 +232,8 @@ static void atmel_stop_rx(struct uart_port *port)
   */

and potentially add those flags for  dealing with the  CTS & RTS   ,  
that may not be used on every board,  because this clean up sit's in  
my minor changes for the YL9200, specifically to  re-jig the USARTS  
lines so that we can separate  RXD TXD , from a forced requirment to  
use  control lines when using  232

Steve



> I currently have the patches applied in the order you sent them,  
> with my
> stuff wedged in between (thanks to git-rebase --interactive.) So I
> think it makes sense to do the interrupt handler splitup first, even
> though I personally care more about the DMA patch.
>
> Haavard
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> List admin: http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/linux- 
> arm-kernel
> FAQ:        http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/mailinglists/faq.php
> Etiquette:  http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/mailinglists/etiquette.php
>


--
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/


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