RE: [PATCH/RFC] 8250: Auto RS485 direction control

Christopher Gibson
2008-08-09T10:09:33Z

On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 18:33 +0200, Tosoni wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Christopher Gibson
> >
--- 8< ---
>
> S. (Maybe an ill
> > conceived UART is just an ART;) Also if this is to also be useful
for
> > radio communications then it may be necessary to provide a mechanism
> > where lead in and lead out times can be specified for the control.
> >
> > As far as IOCTL names go I dislike the CRTSTOGGLE, toggling
> > the RTS line
> > is an incorrect description of function.
>
> It is incorrect only if you introduce the timings. Please note that
Windows
> has RTS_TOGGLE, no extra timings, and nobody seems to complain.
> Wait wait... I am not saying that you are wrong. Last year I had to
write a
> (non unix) driver to handle these kinks of timings. But the case is
not
> usual.
>

Sorry was being pedantic about naming. When I said that CRTSTOGGLE was
an incorrect description of function, I was meaning toggle normally
means (in both electronic and mechanical systems) that something
switches between two stable states on application of a signal or force.
(Like the mechanism on the top of a pen to make the nib poke out or
retract.) For this reason it seems wrong to me call the RTS direction
control a toggle function.

> > I prefer CARTS as it is not an
> > incorrect description of function. CARTS - auto request to send is
> > rather ambiguous though. If I was to suggest a name it would
> > be RTSADC
> > - request to send auto direction control (maybe with a
> > preceding C if it
> > went into termios cflags).

--- 8< ---

On reflection I think I was getting carried away when I suggested adding
timings to the "lead in" and "lead out". Will discuss this in greater
detail in reply to another email on this thread.

--
Christopher Gibson <chris@toftronix.com.au>