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
next prev parent 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