[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f0d81b33-486a-4b4a-8c51-9291ec272026@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 07:29:40 +0100
From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
To: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...on.dev>, geert+renesas@...der.be,
magnus.damm@...il.com, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
conor+dt@...nel.org, mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, p.zabel@...gutronix.de, g.liakhovetski@....de,
lethal@...ux-sh.org
Cc: linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@...renesas.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] serial: sh-sci: Check if TX data was written to
device in .tx_empty()
On 14. 11. 24, 7:26, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>>>> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c
>>>> @@ -157,6 +157,7 @@ struct sci_port {
>>>> bool has_rtscts;
>>>> bool autorts;
>>>> + bool first_time_tx;
>>>
>>> This is a misnomer. It suggests to be set only during the first TX.
>>
>> I chose this naming as this was the scenario I discovered it didn't work.
>> Reproducible though these steps:
>>
>> 1/ open the serial device (w/o running any TX/RX)
>> 2/ call tx_empty()
>>
>> What
>>> about ::did_tx, ::performed_tx, ::transmitted, or alike?
>>
>> I have nothing against any of these. Can you please let me know if you
>> have
>> a preferred one?
>
> No, you choose, or invent even better one :). Or let AI do it for you.
FWIW both gemini and chatgpt answered by "tx_occurred" to my question.
Which I like the most, perhaps.
--
js
suse labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists