Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 8 Apr 2022 15:49:20 +0300 | From | Andy Shevchenko <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] tty: Add lookahead param to receive_buf |
| |
On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 03:34:27PM +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: > On Fri, 8 Apr 2022, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 02:39:53PM +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
...
> > > + if (c == STOP_CHAR(tty)) { > > > + if (!lookahead_done) > > > > But now it can be as below > > > > if (c == STOP_CHAR(tty) && !lookahead_done) > > > > > + stop_tty(tty); > > > + } else if ((c == START_CHAR(tty) && !lookahead_done) || > > > (tty->flow.stopped && !tty->flow.tco_stopped && I_IXANY(tty) && > > > c != INTR_CHAR(tty) && c != QUIT_CHAR(tty) && > > > c != SUSP_CHAR(tty))) { > > Are you sure about this? ...If I make that change to the first if, the > second part of the else if's condition get a chance it didn't have > previously.
Oh, indeed. This will give a chance to the rest of the second conditional to be triggered because of ||.
> What I'd like to do here is to take advantage of the function that was > added: > > if (!n_tty_receive_char_flow_ctrl(tty, c) && > tty->flow.stopped && !tty->flow.tco_stopped && I_IXANY(tty) && > c != INTR_CHAR(tty) && c != QUIT_CHAR(tty) && > c != SUSP_CHAR(tty))) { > start_tty(tty); > process_echoes(tty); > } > ...but it will change STOP_CHAR vs START_CHAR precedence for the case > where they're the same characters. I don't know if it matters.
No idea of impact of such change.
-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
| |