Hi Andrew, We can do the interface testing but I want to know how to get the latest source. We need about 5 days to do the testing for all models and give you a testing report. Thanks. Danny. -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Lunn [mailto:andrew@xxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 3:55 AM To: Johan Hovold Cc: Andrew Lunn; linux-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Danny Lin (林政易); Ray Chen (陳松昱) Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] usb-serial: Moxa UPORT 12XX/14XX/16XX driver On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 07:27:42PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote: > On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 12:57:45PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 11:53:00AM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > [...] > > > > +#define MX_INT_RS232 0 > > > +#define MX_INT_2W_RS485 1 > > > +#define MX_INT_RS422 2 > > > +#define MX_INT_4W_RS485 3 > > > > +static ssize_t show_four_wire(struct device *dev, > > > + struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf) > > > +{ > > > + struct usb_serial_port *port = to_usb_serial_port(dev); > > > + struct mxuport_port *mxport = usb_get_serial_port_data(port); > > > + > > > + return sprintf(buf, "%i\n", mxport->four_wire_rs485); > > > > Use scnprintf (and PAGE_SIZE) even if it's a bool. > > > > > +} > > > + > > > +static ssize_t store_four_wire(struct device *dev, > > > + struct device_attribute *attr, > > > + const char *buf, size_t size) > > > +{ > > > + struct usb_serial_port *port = to_usb_serial_port(dev); > > > + struct mxuport_port *mxport = usb_get_serial_port_data(port); > > > + > > > + if (strtobool(buf, &mxport->four_wire_rs485) < 0) > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + > > > + return size; > > > +} > > > + > > > +static DEVICE_ATTR(4_wire_rs485, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, > > > + show_four_wire, store_four_wire); > > > > Use DEVICE_ATTR_RW. > > > > You dropped RS422-support from v3. Was that intentional? > > > > Hmmm. I've been thinking a bit how best to handle this, and I think we > > should consider adding a SER_RS485_4_WIRE flag to serial_rs485 instead > > of having a custom attribute. That still leaves RS422, which could > > possibly be enabled using the RS485-ioctl as well (or we use a > > rs422-attribute for now). > > > > I'll get back to you on this. > > After giving this some more thought I don't really think the > TIOCSRS485-ioctl interface is appropriate after all. The > RQ_VENDOR_SET_INTERFACE-request doesn't just enable 2-wire-rs485-style > signalling, but also changes which pins on the DB9-connector that are > used. > > This should probably remain a device-specific parameter. We already have > the MOXA mxser-driver with similar configuration options. This one uses > a custom ioctl to set the interface, but I think we should use a sysfs > parameter for this. > > What do you say about a simple "interface"-parameter representing the > four MX_INT-values above? A string parameter would perhaps be even > better if you combine it with an "interface_available"-parameter, for > example: > > # cat /sys/bus/usb-serial/devices/ttyUSB0/interface_available > rs232 rs422 rs485-2w rs485-4w > > for devices which can use all four modes. > > Sorry about the confusion. Hi Johan No problems. I'm actually tempted to drop the support for anything over than RS232. That is all the hardware i have can do. So anything we do add i cannot test. If somebody does have the necessary hardware and the need for these extra modes we can come back to this. Andrew ?頨{.n?????%??橆??w?{.n???{殺???緡w* jg炳????▏?拷G??９ ８夸:+v??鋟喓???茶 庫全??ㄑ搬?????
