On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 04:57:49PM +0300, Sergey Organov wrote: > Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 12:22:08PM +0300, Sergey Organov wrote: > >> Don't let receiver hardware automatically control RTS output if it > >> was requested to be inactive. > >> > >> To ensure this, set_termios() shouldn't set UCR2_CTSC bit if UCR2_CTS > >> (=TIOCM_RTS) is cleared. Added corresponding check in imx_uart_rts_auto() > >> to fix this. > >> > >> Reviewed-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > I think it's a bit bold to add a review-tag for me here. The best reason > > for that that I'm aware of is that I wrote for v4: "[I]f you update the > > commit log as agreed already before and even add a comment in > > imx_uart_rts_auto along the lines of ... you can have my Ack." which IMO > > isn't good enough to justify a "Reviewed-by". I wouldn't even add an > > Acked-by: without the other person being able to actually see the > > changed patch (but this might be arguable). > > I'll do whatever you say. Should I remove the Reviewed-by: you, or is it > OK to leave it in, to avoid re-iterating again? I'd like to have it an Acked-by. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
