From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: w.sang@pengutronix.de (Wolfram Sang) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 22:53:18 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] RS485: fix inconsistencies in the meaning of some variables In-Reply-To: <4EBA9385.7010806@evidence.eu.com> References: <4E492CFF.7040905@pwrnet.de> <20110822211832.GA8023@kroah.com> <4EB3A009.10502@evidence.eu.com> <4EB8F6B9.6010008@atmel.com> <4EB90902.4030200@evidence.eu.com> <20111108134804.07095c5d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20111108142432.GA11293@kroah.com> <4EBA9385.7010806@evidence.eu.com> Message-ID: <20111113215318.GA2966@pengutronix.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi, I have been working on a patch series which adds hardware RS485 to the 8250 according to the latest developments. The series will be posted tomorrow after some more tests. However, there is one thing I wondered about: > From now on, SER_RS485_RTS_AFTER_SEND and SER_RS485_RTS_ON_SEND will be used to > set the voltage of the RTS pin (as in the crisv10.c driver); the delay will be > understood by looking only at the value of delay_rts_before_send and > delay_rts_after_send. Do I overlook something or is SER_RS485_RTS_AFTER_SEND always the inverted signal of SER_RS485_RTS_ON_SEND. So why do we need both? (BTW SER_RS485_RTS_ON_SEND is a non-obvious name, I think. But changing it will probably break even more users?) > diff --git a/include/linux/serial.h b/include/linux/serial.h > index 97ff8e2..3d86517 100644 > --- a/include/linux/serial.h > +++ b/include/linux/serial.h > @@ -207,13 +207,15 @@ struct serial_icounter_struct { > > struct serial_rs485 { > __u32 flags; /* RS485 feature flags */ > -#define SER_RS485_ENABLED (1 << 0) > -#define SER_RS485_RTS_ON_SEND (1 << 1) > -#define SER_RS485_RTS_AFTER_SEND (1 << 2) > -#define SER_RS485_RTS_BEFORE_SEND (1 << 3) > +#define SER_RS485_ENABLED (1 << 0) /* If enabled */ > +#define SER_RS485_RTS_ON_SEND (1 << 1) /* Logical level for > + RTS pin when > + sending */ > +#define SER_RS485_RTS_AFTER_SEND (1 << 2) /* Logical level for > + RTS pin after sent*/ Nit: 80 char should be broken here, because that is not readable. Or put the comment above the define. Thanks, Wolfram -- Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: