public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: "Kilau, Scott" <Scott_Kilau@digi.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SIIG 8-port serial boards support
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 21:26:32 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060217212632.GD13502@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <335DD0B75189FB428E5C32680089FB9F8034C6@mtk-sms-mail01.digi.com>

On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 02:32:03PM -0600, Kilau, Scott wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> (Sorry for the ugly copy/paste here, grabbing from a web browser to
> email)
> 
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 08:02:13PM +0000, Russell King wrote:
> > Finally, let me explain why I favour the termios solution.  The
> biggest
> > (and most important) aspect is that it allows existing applications
> > such as minicom and gettys to work as expected - getting the correct
> > handshaking mode that they desire without having to change userspace.
> 
> What about creating a "struct termiox".
> Yeah, it creates a new ioctl, but it is a pretty standard
> ioctl among Unix's.
> 
> I know adding termiox calls has been brought up before in
> the past, and of course, nothing ever gets added...

That still requires getty's and minicom etc to be modified, and as
I point out in my follow up mail, not having getty understand it
can be a security issue.

Since we do have spare bits in cflag, I see no reason not to use
them.  If we use these spare bits, we stand a good chance that we'll
have the desired behaviour without modifying userland.

I've seen the occasional alternative suggestion, but no one has yet
put forward a coherent argument against using termios's cflags to
control the handshake mode.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:  2.6 Serial core

  reply	other threads:[~2006-02-17 21:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-02-17 20:32 [PATCH] SIIG 8-port serial boards support Kilau, Scott
2006-02-17 21:26 ` Russell King [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-02-17 22:25 linux
2006-02-17 22:39 ` Russell King
2006-02-17 23:11   ` Paul Fulghum
2006-01-24  8:25 Andrey Panin
2006-01-24 21:01 ` Russell King
2006-02-02 10:26   ` Russell King
2006-02-02 13:27     ` Andrey Panin
     [not found]       ` <20060202201734.GA17329@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
2006-02-03  9:13         ` Andrey Panin
2006-02-03  9:24           ` Russell King
2006-02-17 11:39             ` Andrey Panin
2006-02-17 20:02               ` Russell King
2006-02-17 20:14                 ` Russell King
2006-02-17 21:27                 ` Paul Fulghum
2006-02-17 21:39                   ` Russell King
2006-02-17 21:52                     ` Paul Fulghum

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20060217212632.GD13502@flint.arm.linux.org.uk \
    --to=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=Scott_Kilau@digi.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox