On Fri, 9 Dec 2011 18:07:18 +0100 Wolfram Sang <w.sang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Report the only mode we can support with the 16C850. > > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/tty/serial/8250.c | 3 +++ > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250.c b/drivers/tty/serial/8250.c > index 28b3608..8cf6d76 100644 > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250.c > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250.c > @@ -2750,6 +2750,9 @@ static int serial8250_ioctl_port(struct uart_port *port, > serial_outp(up, UART_LCR, lcr); > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&up->port.lock, flags); > > + /* only mode supported by the 16C850 */ > + rs485ctrl.flags &= ~SER_RS485_RTS_ON_SEND; > + rs485ctrl.flags |= SER_RS485_RTS_AFTER_SEND; > up->rs485_flags = rs485ctrl.flags; Chip specific stuff all wants to be in a port method so while #3 sorts out much of #2 this goes back to wanting port-> methods and flags to avoid assumptions about chip types in the core bits. #7 really makes the point why it is needed. So pardon the confused series of review comments but I think the summary is port->ops for RS485 stuff please. -- 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
