On Sat, 2015-12-05 at 12:43PM -0500, Peter Hurley wrote: > On 11/21/2015 09:59 PM, Soren Brinkmann wrote: > > Ignore RX-related interrupts if RX is not enabled. > > This doesn't look like a safe approach; fast-forward a couple of years and > some is trying to add some feature but can't figure out why no data is > arriving... > > What is this trying to solve? I definitely saw two kinds of lock ups. One was on the TX side, that the system tried to print with the transmitter disabled. The other on the RX side. I don't recall the details, but the system was stuck in some RX-related function waiting for data while the receiver was disabled. I think my explanation was that some IRQ condition becomes true and is dispatched to the RX handler even though the receiver isn't enabled. I guess a better way for solving this would be to disable the IRQs that call the RX handler when the receiver is disabled. Sören -- 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
