On 04/06/2012 03:28 PM, Williams, Dan J wrote: > On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 04/06/2012 12:49 PM, Dan Williams wrote: >>> The "KT" serial port has another use case for a "received break" quirk, >>> so before adding another special case to the 8250 core take this >>> opportunity to push such quirks out of the core and into a uart_port op. >> >> This doesn't seem quite right. Why do the board files have to set up >> this .handle_break function; they're already setting .type=PORT_TEGRA, >> which should be enough to drive the setup of any required quirks. > > Because struct serial8250_config does not convey any uart_port ops. But couldn't it be enhanced to do so, just like this patch added a field to struct uart_port for this? If you went this route, then the change would be entirely isolated within 8250.c, so you could drop all the arch/arm/mach-tegra changes, and also not need to update of_serial.c. >> I'm not sure what the implication is of moving the call to clr_fifo() >> into uart_handle_break(). What's the benefit of one location over the other? > > This was the location where the core was already doing it's break > handling, so it made sense to check here if the device had any quirks > to run. There shouldn't be any implications because the core was > already doing clear_rx_fifo() immediately before calling > uart_handle_break. Here is the relevant hunk with a bit more context: Ah OK, that part seems fine then. -- 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
