[ Please try to avoid top-posting. ]
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 07:22:01PM +0200, Michał Pecio wrote:
> I managed to reproduce this old issue, both on vanilla v4.1.1 and with
> my patch, IF and ONLY if I reverted commit 623c82633 by changing:
>
> - if (!old_termios || memcmp(buf, priv->line_settings, 7)) {
> ret = pl2303_set_line_request(port, buf);
> if (!ret)
> memcpy(priv->line_settings, buf, 7);
> - }
That was expected. Thanks for verifying.
> Bottom line: my patch seems safe and fixes custom baud rates below 94k,
> which are completely screwed without it.
>
> The only thing I could imagine going wrong is chips which actually
> interpret baud rate settings the way described in the old comment.
>
> This definitely isn't my HX (rev A) nor my other HX knockoff.
>
> This also isn't whatever chips Frank Schäfer used during 57ce61aad748
> development.
>
> Finally, this probably isn't this comment author's chip either. I bet
> he wrote the comment and then randomly tweaked the code until it started
> working with actual hardware without realizing that the comment is wrong
> and doesn't describe the code anymore.
Sounds plausible. I'll take at look at your patch.
Thanks,
Johan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
