[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080921151407.10c89452@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 15:14:07 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@....no>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, werner@...nelius-consult.de,
frank@...gswood-consulting.co.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Winchiphead 340/1: full baud rate and status/control
line support
Some niggles but this is a big improvement to the code.
> static int ch341_set_baudrate(struct usb_device *dev,
> + struct tty_struct *tty,
> struct ch341_private *priv)
> + baud = CH341_BAUDBASE_FACTOR / t1;
> +
> + if (baud && tty)
> + tty_encode_baud_rate(tty, baud, baud);
Can you really get a speed below 1 baud ?
If there is a hangup requested (c_cflag & CBAUD) == B0 then you don't
want to overwrite the baud rate but that you handled in set_termios
already.
> +static void ch341_close(struct tty_struct *tty, struct usb_serial_port *port,
> + struct file *filp)
> +{
> + struct ch341_private *priv = usb_get_serial_port_data(port);
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + dbg("%s - port %d", __func__, port->number);
> +
> + /* shutdown our urbs */
> + dbg("%s - shutting down urbs", __func__);
> + usb_kill_urb(port->write_urb);
> + usb_kill_urb(port->read_urb);
> + usb_kill_urb(port->interrupt_in_urb);
> +
> + if (tty) {
close should never be called with tty == NULL unless there is some kind
of internal abuse of it - is the tty check really needed ?
> @@ -242,21 +320,34 @@ static int ch341_open(struct tty_struct *tty, struct usb_serial_port *port,
> dbg("ch341_open()");
>
> priv->baud_rate = DEFAULT_BAUD_RATE;
> - priv->dtr = 1;
> - priv->rts = 1;
> +
> + if (C_CLOCAL(tty))
Open on the other hand is currently called with tty = NULL in the case it
is used as a console device (ugly and something I want to fix but it
happens for now)
> @@ -270,38 +361,207 @@ static void ch341_set_termios(struct tty_struct *tty,
> {
> struct ch341_private *priv = usb_get_serial_port_data(port);
> unsigned baud_rate;
> + unsigned long flags;
>
> dbg("ch341_set_termios()");
>
> + if (!tty)
> + return;
> +
set_termios should never be called with tty == NULL nowdays so that test
should be removable.
> + control = priv->line_control;
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&priv->lock, flags);
> +
> + return ch341_set_handshake(port->serial->dev, control);
> +}
This could race another set_handshake ? I'm not sure it matters and I'd
suggest that stuff gets fixed after this is submitted separately
--
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