lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Dec]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 0/7] tty: add flag to suppress ready signalling on open
On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 09:46:54AM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 10. 12. 20, 19:59, Mychaela Falconia wrote:
> > > O_DIRECT is an interesting hack, has anyone seen if it violates the
> > > posix rules for us to use it on a character device like this?
> >
> > According to open(2) Linux man page, O_DIRECT does not come from POSIX
> > at all, instead it is specific to Linux, FreeBSD and SGI IRIX. Thus
> > it seems like there aren't any POSIX rules to be violated here.
> >
> > If we go with O_DIRECT, what semantics are we going to implement?
> > There are 3 possibilities that come to mind most readily:
> >
> > 1) O_DIRECT applies only to the open call in which this flag is set,
> > and suppresses DTR/RTS assertion on that open. If someone needs to do
> > multiple opens with DTR/RTS suppression being required every time,
> > then they need to include O_DIRECT every time.
> >
> > 2) O_DIRECT applies not only immediately, but also sets a latched flag
> > whereby all subsequent opens continue to suppress auto-assertion
> > without requiring O_DIRECT every time. This approach by itself runs
> > counter to the generic Unix way of doing things, but it may be OK if
> > there is also some ioctl to explicitly set or clear the latched flag.
> >
> > 3) O_DIRECT applies only to the open call in which it is set, no
> > built-in latching, but there is also some ioctl to control a flag
> > enabling or disabling DTR/RTS auto-assertion on subsequent opens.
>
> 3) -- to allow standard tools to work on the device after the quirk is set
> up once.

I'm lost, what do you mean here?

thanks,

greg k-h

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-12-11 17:11    [W:0.135 / U:0.184 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site