Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758983AbXEXNgi (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 May 2007 09:36:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757389AbXEXNgb (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 May 2007 09:36:31 -0400 Received: from outpipe-village-512-1.bc.nu ([81.2.110.250]:34722 "EHLO the-village.bc.nu" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757254AbXEXNga (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 May 2007 09:36:30 -0400 Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 14:41:09 +0100 From: Alan Cox To: David Woodhouse Cc: akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paulus@samba.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] $ARCH: Enable arbitary speed tty ioctls and split input/output speed Message-ID: <20070524144109.7bd0f4d0@the-village.bc.nu> In-Reply-To: <1180012135.8303.89.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <20070523172739.1d3a918c@the-village.bc.nu> <1180012135.8303.89.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 2.9.1 (GTK+ 2.10.8; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Organization: Red Hat UK Cyf., Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, Y Deyrnas Gyfunol. Cofrestrwyd yng Nghymru a Lloegr o'r rhif cofrestru 3798903 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1333 Lines: 33 On Thu, 24 May 2007 09:08:55 -0400 David Woodhouse wrote: > Is my mailbox (or brain) failing me, or did you just send out these > patches for every architecture _except_ PowerPC? :) PowerPC is one of the main ones I've not touched because it needs work itself to sort out the IBSHIFT value and bit allocations, also because its one of several dependant upon the asm-generic stuff (which also means your patch won't work) Most people copied the x86 behaviour which makes it easy to transplant. Some are just smoking something (see ioctls.h for sh-64 and weep), others have slightly odd behaviour for historical compatibility reasons (Sparc) > Presumably this is because of the mess in tty_termios_encode_baud_rate > when we fix its bogus assumptions about IBSHIFT always being defined? It's not a bogus assumption. The current code supports - The old way - BOTHER and IBSHIFT When PPC wants to do arbitary baud rate it needs to resolve both of the definitions together. IBSHIFT is simply the shift you apply to the baud bits to get the input baud bits. Alan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/