On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 15:55 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > I found it independently actually .. It looks like there's at least two > > problems. This jtag driver has a status register which flags when RX is > > available, and TX is possible. I'm not sure this status register fits > > into the model. The other thing is that we have a ttyJ registered for > > this driver, and it would be nice to use that over something like ttyHVC > > (I'm not sure if that name is correct, just a guess). > > Really? Is there a compelling reason to perpetuate this serial device > namespace fragmentation nonsense? Your initial patch even had a config > option to hijack /dev/ttyS0 because of that. I'm not sure how to interpret what your saying .. Are you saying we should use /dev/hvcX or shouldn't ? the reason I want to use ttyJ is because it was assigned specifically for jtags which, to me, makes things a lot less confusing. Daniel -- Sent by a consultant of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
