On 2008-08-04, Grant Edwards <grante@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2008-08-04, Laurent Pinchart <laurentp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Monday 04 August 2008, Tosoni wrote: >>> About the flags names -- CARTS, UART_FCTR_RS485 >>> >>> May I suggest CRTSTOGGLE since it is known by that kind of name in other >>> OS's :-) >> >> I like Russell's proposal of sticking to CRTSCTS and adding options to setserial: >> >>> Should CRTSCTS be a global "enable some kind of flow control" bit and >>> setserial be used to configure the actual flow control method >>> (conventional RTS/CTS, DTR/DSR, alternate RTS/CTS, RS485 on RTS, >>> RS485 on DTR) ? >> >> Any opinion on that ? > > Opposed. > > 1) CRTSCTS means something quite specific. Rather than > overload that name for something unrelated, create a new > mode bit for the new mode. Besides, there are often times when you want _both_ RTS toggle and CTS flow control. If both RTS toggle and RTSCTS flow control are set, the "toggle" function would have priority control of the RTS pin. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! Was my SOY LOAF left at out in th'RAIN? It tastes visi.com REAL GOOD!! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html