From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752083AbXCHPQY (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 10:16:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752094AbXCHPQY (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 10:16:24 -0500 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([217.147.92.249]:3700 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752083AbXCHPQY (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 10:16:24 -0500 Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 15:16:12 +0000 From: Russell King To: Rob Prowel Cc: Stuart MacDonald , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: questions about 8250 uart support for adhoc boards Message-ID: <20070308151612.GD30023@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mail-Followup-To: Rob Prowel , Stuart MacDonald , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <028501c75aa2$54ae9d80$294b82ce@stuartm> <45E49759.6050301@kuchera.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <45E49759.6050301@kuchera.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 03:40:57PM -0500, Rob Prowel wrote: > Stuart MacDonald wrote: > >Would it be more intuitive to give ports the default uartclk of > >1843200 at init time? That would avoid this issue, but would make the > >baud rates come out wrong on hardware with a non-standard clock, if a > >base baud wasn't specified. > > > > > > I prefer the option to specify the base baud rate in setserial from a > startup script. Having the additional ports at BAUD 0 (unusable) until > some explicit action is taken strikes me as a safer option, provided > this gets properly documented in the kernel Documentation directory and > in Linux HOWTO docs. Is someone going to do that? Who volunteers? -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: