Hi Johan, Thanks for your review. > Looks like this code could use a few vid/pid temporaries. > I'm not sure it makes sense to try to load a "ti_usb-v110a-p1150.fw" > firmware before requesting the moxa firmware. Avoids a confusing: > usb 1-2.2: Direct firmware load for ti_usb-v110a-p1150.fw failed with error -2 > message too. I'm not sure to get your point here, shall I rename moxa firmwares in linux-firmware repo to be compliant with ti_usb-v%04x-p%04x.fw format ? > I did a quick test of the patch using a Moxa 1150-device. Works at > 115200, but communication appeared broken at 9600. Looks like the baud > rate calculations are similar but not identical to what the Moxa driver > does. Is this something you have looked into? Well, on my moxa 1110 communication is working at 9600, 115200 and other baud rates. However, I think baud rate calculation may be wrong for TI3410 chips. According to table 5-13 in datasheet http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tusb3410.pdf the baud rate calculation formula, is : baud_rate = 923077 / (desired_baud_rate) So, we get : desired_baud = 9600 -> baud_rate = 923077 / 9600 = 96 desired_baud = 115200 -> baud_rate = 923077 / 115200 = 8 ... In ti_usb_3410_5052 driver, the formula used for 3410 is : baud_rate = (923077 + desired_baud_rate/2) / desired_baud_rate so, desired_baud = 9600 -> baud_rate = (923077 + 9600/2) / 9600 = 97 (!= 96) desired_baud = 115200 -> baud_rate = (923077 + 115200/2) / 115200 = 9 (!= 8) It seems the formula is wrong but some firmware deal with it anyway. Should I correct the formula or use a quirk for moxa devices ? Thank you, Mathieu -- 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
