From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24300C433F5 for ; Mon, 30 May 2022 16:23:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236363AbiE3QXf (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 May 2022 12:23:35 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35860 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234818AbiE3QXe (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 May 2022 12:23:34 -0400 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4601:e00::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61B7957B33; Mon, 30 May 2022 09:23:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED7A0B80E75; Mon, 30 May 2022 16:23:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C8705C385B8; Mon, 30 May 2022 16:23:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1653927809; bh=ht6XEoFiNhtg5eJtqnGr2xAtkI8fVlEizDAsobVhHYg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=znBC5C8kKYkxi9tsJLVOVuW2x1YNbFPLaDmnu9AmyozoTBYJaaorgSqUjUvERzwIs ujtGE3lRialiSBEkLHVs33ZMUsgilOXehC+KmPJQtDnHw2LhDiL5Ljlzp4x0TTm/OS F/YAflFEig66S2gFS+JWF0EvBOlsxMqF3bGr4W4U= Date: Mon, 30 May 2022 18:23:25 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Mychaela Falconia Cc: Johan Hovold , Jiri Slaby , linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] serial ports: add ability to suppress raising DTR & RTS on open Message-ID: References: <20220527222703.BA4D3374020E@freecalypso.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 08:05:00AM -0800, Mychaela Falconia wrote: > Greg K-H wrote: > > > To ignore the public, accepted, standard is to become an operating > > system that does not follow the standard, which would not be a good > > thing at all. > > So is FreeBSD 13.x a bad OS then, because it offers an *option* of > suppressing this particular standard-mandated behaviour? I never said that, please do not be disengenous, that will only get you added to people's email filters to be ignored. > > Again, that is the standard, why wouldn't you want to do that? To not > > do that would be to break interoperability with millions of devices out > > there (remember modems?) > > I don't need to "remember" modems, I use them almost every day in my > test lab - but none of my proposed patch versions (nor FreeBSD's recent > CNO_RTSDTR feature addition) break interoperability with anything, > instead both FreeBSD's solution (for their OS) and my proposed Linux > patches merely provide an *option* for more specialized hw devices > that require different handling. That's fine, but again, you were ranting against the existing standard as if that was the thing that is wrong and broken here. Not your one-off hardware implementation that does not follow the existing standard. Please read the context you cut out. > > > The solution implemented in FreeBSD relies on a feature of that OS > > > which does not exist in Linux: initial-state devices. > > > > Linux dropped those a long time ago for good reasons, let's not revisit > > that design decision again please. > > Dropped? Are you saying that Linux once had them at some point in the > past? Yes we had much the same thing, but they might have worked a bit differently. Check the 2.2 kernel days or earlier. > > From what I recall with the original patch series, Johan is the author > > of these, not you. Rebasing and forwarding on is great, but please > > never drop original authorship of patches, that's just rude, and in > > some cases, ripe for legal worries. > > In the case of the 3 patches which originate from Johan (1/6, 2/6 and > 4/6), I submitted them with the following attribution: > > From: me > [...] > Co-developed-by: Johan > Signed-off-by: Johan > Signed-off-by: me > > My reading of Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst told me > this was the correct protocol - but if I got it wrong, what is the > correct way then? Specifically, what is the correct protocol when > (in this chronological order): "From:" would be from Johan as he wrote the commit. thanks, greg k-h