Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v7] serial: support for 16550A serial ports on LP-8x4x | From | Sergei Ianovich <> | Date | Tue, 01 Mar 2016 20:14:32 +0300 |
| |
On Tue, 2016-03-01 at 18:46 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, 2016-03-01 at 19:25 +0300, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > > On Tue, 2016-03-01 at 13:06 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Tue, 2016-03-01 at 00:26 +0300, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > > > > > + len &= 3; > > Mask as well to be defined.
Sure.
> So, but if you support only fixed rates, why do you care about BOTHER > at all?
If BOTHER is defined, tty_termios_baud_rate() and tty_termios_encode_baud_rate() allow non-standard baud rates. I should clear it from c_cflag to indicate I don't support it.
> > > > > > > I think you can call this unconditionally together with case > > > > 115200. > > > > The calls are orthogonal. This one deals with the case when BOTHER > > is > > defined and set, and we have non-zero rate with BOTHER, but we have > > zero rate after BOTHER is cleared. So we set 9600 as a sane default > > speed.
> > > > This one deals with the case when the rate is over 115200. If the > > previous case has been triggered, this one won't be. > > Yeah, but I meant to unconditionally call it just once here every > time.
I see. It saves a few lines.
> > --- > > drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_lp8841.c: In function > > 'lp8841_serial_probe': > > drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_lp8841.c:124:32: warning: excess > > elements in struct initializer > > struct uart_8250_port uart = {0}; > > ^ > > drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_lp8841.c:124:32: note: (near > > initialization for 'uart.port.lock.<anonymous>.rlock.raw_lock') > > Do you have any warning verbosity enabled? I see a lot of stuff like > this in the code
Plain `make`.
The warning seems to be the result of initializing a spinlock with zero. Spinlocks are intentionally obfuscated, but I didn't investigate further.
> $ git grep -n 'struct .* = {0};' | wc -l > 338 > > $ git grep -n 'struct .* = { \?0 \?};' | wc -l > 550 > > ( '… = { 0 };' included)
The first structure member is most likely not a spinlock in those cases.
> > --- > > > > Zero triggers a warning. I'll use memset(). > > Either will work.
OK
The only remaining open point is BOTHER handling.
| |