On 12.05.2014 08:30, Huang Shijie wrote:
于 2014年05月12日 13:45, Dirk Behme 写道:
On 12.05.2014 05:40, Huang Shijie wrote:
于 2014年05月09日 23:19, dean_jenkins@xxxxxxxxxx 写道:
Use imx_start_tx() just to enable the TX interrupt. It's the job of the
TX interrupt ISR to fill the transmit buffer, then. If the transmit
buffer
From the Documentation/serial/driver, we can see:
-----------------------------------------
start_tx(port)
Start transmitting characters.
-----------------------------------------
It tells us we can transmit data in the imx_start_tx.
Well, it depends how you read 'Start transmitting', no?
It doesn't have to mean 'actually transmit data'. It talks about
'start'. And this could also mean 'start the transmission (by enabling
the interrupt)'.
But this patch moves it to the interrupt handler,
It doesn't 'move' any code to the interrupt handler. The code in the
interrupt handler is already there.
this patch makes the
interrupt handler do more jobs.
... to get the locking in the correct order.
Best regards
Dirk
is empty, the TX interrupt should be executed as soon as the start_tx()
enables the interrupt, so there is no reason for the extra
imx_transmit_buffer() call, here. Remove it.
I don't know why this patch needed?
What problem this patch fix or improve?
As stated in the commit message, the call of imx_transmit_buffer()
isn't needed there, so it can be removed. I.e. remove unneeded code.
In the end, this cleans up the possible locking path, so that in the
third patch the locking issue can be easily fixed.
The lock issue had been fixed already. Please try the latest linux-next.
see my comment in the third patch.
--
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
