linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] pch_uart: Delete modem status interrupt enable code

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: <4EB0DAB6.7000106@dsn.lapis-semi.com>
Date:	Wed, 02 Nov 2011 14:52:54 +0900
From:	Tomoya MORINAGA <tomoya-linux@....lapis-semi.com>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>
CC:	gregkh@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, qi.wang@...el.com,
	yong.y.wang@...el.com, joel.clark@...el.com, kok.howg.ewe@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] pch_uart: Delete modem status interrupt enable code

(2011/11/01 21:57), Alan Cox wrote:
>> (pch_uart device has auto hardware flow control function. So,
>> pch_uart driver doesn't have to control modem status interrupt.)
>
> This is true for flow control bits but not for incoming carrier detect ?

Called ".get_mctrl" function, other software can know incoming carrier 
detection.
Or you mean a uart driver must detect incoming carrier with interrupt ?

>> This patch deletes the code.
>
>> +	dev_info(priv->port.dev,
>> +		"PCH UART : Modem status interrupt is not
>> supported.\n"); }
>
> dev_info seems wrong here. Does the user need to know this ?
OK, a user doesn't have to know the information.
I will delete the dev_info.

Thanks,
-- 
tomoya
ROHM Co., Ltd.
--
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/