Expected behavior of set_termios() w.r.t. TX FIFO?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Greg, Jiri, Peter,

I'm wondering what is the expected behavior of calling
uart_ops.set_termios() w.r.t. characters that are already queued in the
UART's TX FIFO.

  - Should it wait (block) until all queued characters have been
    transmitted, before changing the UART's settings?
  - Should it apply the new settings immediately, affecting the already
    queued characters?
  - Should it apply the new settings, dropping the already queued
    characters?
  - Is calling uart_ops.set_termios() while the TX FIFO isn't empty
    allowed (this can be triggered easily from userspace)?

uart_ops.set_termios() returns void, so there's no way to return an error.

Currently the sh-sci driver blocks until the TX FIFO has been emptied,
which may never happen if hardware flow control is enabled, and the remote
side never asserts CTS, leading to:

        NMI watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 22s!

See also "[PATCH 2/2] serial: sh-sci: Fix hang in sci_reset()",
https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/12/2/225).

Thanks for your answer!

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux PPP]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linmodem]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Kernel for ARM]

  Powered by Linux