linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 6/6] tty: serial: lpuart: add a more accurate baud rate calculation method

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: <AM3PR04MB30630CDA4E0FD2B5079072E80CD0@AM3PR04MB306.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Mon, 12 Jun 2017 14:23:10 +0000
From:   "A.S. Dong" <aisheng.dong@....com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
CC:     "linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm Mailing List" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>, Andy Duan <fugang.duan@....com>,
        Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>,
        Mingkai Hu <mingkai.hu@....com>, "Y.B. Lu" <yangbo.lu@....com>,
        Dong Aisheng <dongas86@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 6/6] tty: serial: lpuart: add a more accurate baud rate
 calculation method

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Shevchenko [mailto:andy.shevchenko@...il.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 09, 2017 11:49 PM
> To: A.S. Dong
> Cc: linux-serial@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-arm
> Mailing List; Greg Kroah-Hartman; Jiri Slaby; Andy Duan; Stefan Agner;
> Mingkai Hu; Y.B. Lu; Dong Aisheng
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] tty: serial: lpuart: add a more accurate baud
> rate calculation method
> 
> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 5:20 PM, A.S. Dong <aisheng.dong@....com> wrote:
> >> > How about you send a separate baud algorithm improvement patch later?
> >>
> >> Why not to do it right a way?
> >>
> >
> > Because I thought that could be a separate patch which is doing
> > algorithm improvement, then we can have the full history and a clear
> comparison.
> >
> > And also we are still not sure whether it works, we don't want to
> > block on it too long.
> >
> > But if you're pretty sure about it, I would wait for some more time.
> >
> > However, personally I would still rather keep them in two separate
> > Patches for clearer history and comparison.
> 
> Since we already near to -rc5, I would rather agree with you.
> So, please proceed with your approach and we can modify it in relaxing
> mode later on.
> 
> Thanks, and sorry for the delay!

Never mind.
A professional review is always respectable and appreciated.

Thanks

Regards
Dong Aisheng