linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tty/serial_core: Introduce lock mechanism for RS485

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <543C4895.4000902@atmel.com>
Date:	Mon, 13 Oct 2014 23:48:05 +0200
From:	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
To:	Ricardo Ribalda Delgado <ricardo.ribalda@...il.com>
CC:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
	"One Thousand Gnomes" <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tty/serial_core: Introduce lock mechanism for RS485

On 13/10/2014 21:03, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado :
> Hello Nicolas
> 
>>
>> I have the feeling that moving the code chunk that uses this new
>> variable (rs485_enabled) here ...
>>
>>>       ret = uart_add_one_port(&atmel_uart, &port->uart);
>>>       if (ret)
>>>               goto err_add_port;
>>> @@ -2574,7 +2572,7 @@ static int atmel_serial_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>       device_init_wakeup(&pdev->dev, 1);
>>>       platform_set_drvdata(pdev, port);
>>>
>>> -     if (port->uart.rs485.flags & SER_RS485_ENABLED) {
>>> +     if (rs485_enabled) {
>>>               UART_PUT_MR(&port->uart, ATMEL_US_USMODE_NORMAL);
>>>               UART_PUT_CR(&port->uart, ATMEL_US_RTSEN);
>>>       }
>>
>> ... (this one ^^^) up where you can test the SER_RS485_ENABLED, can be
>> even simpler.
>>
>> otherwise, it seems good so you can add my:
>>
>> Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
>>
>> Thanks.
> 
> I supposed that the code needs to be initialized with rs485 disabled
> and then enable it. Also I did not want to change the behaviour a
> driver in a patch that involves 3 other drivers. If you don't mind I
> prefer that this is added to a separated patch.

Fair enough, I can do it later on.

Thanks, bye,
-- 
Nicolas Ferre
--
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/