For the first lines of the patch, I opted to create a small function
instead of breaking the the line in a weird way.
This is v2 of the patch with the name of the function changed from
v1
The other changes are simple ones.
Signed-off-by: Fernando Apesteguia <[email protected]>
---
drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_tty.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_tty.c b/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_tty.c
index af4bc86..557b566 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_tty.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_tty.c
@@ -102,6 +102,7 @@ static int dgnc_tty_write(struct tty_struct *tty, const unsigned char *buf,
static void dgnc_tty_set_termios(struct tty_struct *tty,
struct ktermios *old_termios);
static void dgnc_tty_send_xchar(struct tty_struct *tty, char ch);
+static void dgnc_set_signal_low(struct channel_t *ch, const unsigned char line);
static const struct tty_operations dgnc_tty_ops = {
.open = dgnc_tty_open,
@@ -786,6 +787,12 @@ void dgnc_check_queue_flow_control(struct channel_t *ch)
}
}
+static void dgnc_set_signal_low(struct channel_t *ch, const unsigned char sig)
+{
+ ch->ch_mostat &= ~(sig);
+ ch->ch_bd->bd_ops->assert_modem_signals(ch);
+}
+
void dgnc_wakeup_writes(struct channel_t *ch)
{
int qlen = 0;
@@ -823,19 +830,15 @@ void dgnc_wakeup_writes(struct channel_t *ch)
* If RTS Toggle mode is on, whenever
* the queue and UART is empty, keep RTS low.
*/
- if (ch->ch_digi.digi_flags & DIGI_RTS_TOGGLE) {
- ch->ch_mostat &= ~(UART_MCR_RTS);
- ch->ch_bd->bd_ops->assert_modem_signals(ch);
- }
+ if (ch->ch_digi.digi_flags & DIGI_RTS_TOGGLE)
+ dgnc_set_signal_low(ch, UART_MCR_RTS);
/*
* If DTR Toggle mode is on, whenever
* the queue and UART is empty, keep DTR low.
*/
- if (ch->ch_digi.digi_flags & DIGI_DTR_TOGGLE) {
- ch->ch_mostat &= ~(UART_MCR_DTR);
- ch->ch_bd->bd_ops->assert_modem_signals(ch);
- }
+ if (ch->ch_digi.digi_flags & DIGI_DTR_TOGGLE)
+ dgnc_set_signal_low(ch, UART_MCR_DTR);
}
}
@@ -969,8 +972,9 @@ static int dgnc_tty_open(struct tty_struct *tty, struct file *file)
* touched safely, the close routine will signal the
* ch_flags_wait to wake us back up.
*/
- rc = wait_event_interruptible(ch->ch_flags_wait, (((ch->ch_tun.un_flags |
- ch->ch_pun.un_flags) & UN_CLOSING) == 0));
+ rc = wait_event_interruptible(ch->ch_flags_wait,
+ (((ch->ch_tun.un_flags |
+ ch->ch_pun.un_flags) & UN_CLOSING) == 0));
/* If ret is non-zero, user ctrl-c'ed us */
if (rc)
@@ -1188,11 +1192,12 @@ static int dgnc_block_til_ready(struct tty_struct *tty,
*/
if (sleep_on_un_flags)
retval = wait_event_interruptible
- (un->un_flags_wait, (old_flags != (ch->ch_tun.un_flags |
- ch->ch_pun.un_flags)));
+ (un->un_flags_wait,
+ (old_flags != (ch->ch_tun.un_flags |
+ ch->ch_pun.un_flags)));
else
retval = wait_event_interruptible(ch->ch_flags_wait,
- (old_flags != ch->ch_flags));
+ (old_flags != ch->ch_flags));
/*
* We got woken up for some reason.
@@ -2511,13 +2516,15 @@ static int dgnc_tty_ioctl(struct tty_struct *tty, unsigned int cmd,
if (ch->ch_tun.un_flags & (UN_LOW | UN_EMPTY)) {
ch->ch_tun.un_flags &=
~(UN_LOW | UN_EMPTY);
- wake_up_interruptible(&ch->ch_tun.un_flags_wait);
+ wake_up_interruptible(&ch->ch_tun
+ .un_flags_wait);
}
if (ch->ch_pun.un_flags & (UN_LOW | UN_EMPTY)) {
ch->ch_pun.un_flags &=
~(UN_LOW | UN_EMPTY);
- wake_up_interruptible(&ch->ch_pun.un_flags_wait);
+ wake_up_interruptible(&ch->ch_pun
+ .un_flags_wait);
}
}
}
@@ -2737,7 +2744,10 @@ static int dgnc_tty_ioctl(struct tty_struct *tty, unsigned int cmd,
buf.rxbuf = (ch->ch_r_head - ch->ch_r_tail) & RQUEUEMASK;
buf.txbuf = (ch->ch_w_head - ch->ch_w_tail) & WQUEUEMASK;
- /* Is the UART empty? Add that value to whats in our TX queue. */
+ /*
+ * Is the UART empty?
+ * Add that value to whats in our TX queue.
+ */
count = buf.txbuf + ch_bd_ops->get_uart_bytes_left(ch);
--
2.7.4
On Sun, Dec 04, 2016 at 08:41:04PM +0100, Fernando Apesteguia wrote:
> For the first lines of the patch, I opted to create a small function
> instead of breaking the the line in a weird way.
>
> This is v2 of the patch with the name of the function changed from
> v1
This goes below the --- line.
>
> The other changes are simple ones.
What does that mean? Please always be specific.
thanks,
greg k-h
On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 10:12:56AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 04, 2016 at 08:41:04PM +0100, Fernando Apesteguia wrote:
> > For the first lines of the patch, I opted to create a small function
> > instead of breaking the the line in a weird way.
> >
> > This is v2 of the patch with the name of the function changed from
> > v1
>
> This goes below the --- line.
>
> >
> > The other changes are simple ones.
>
> What does that mean? Please always be specific.
I'll rework the patch.
Thanks.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h