Re: [PATCH] tty: n_gsm: delete SABM command frame as requester

[Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org>]

On 01. 07. 21, 4:54, Zhenguo Zhao wrote:
> From: Zhenguo Zhao <Zhenguo.Zhao1@unisoc.com>
> 
> as initiator,it need to send SABM conmmand ,as requester,there is
> no need to send the SABM control frame,it will cause redundant data.

Hi,

is there any document you can refer to? I am still confused so I don't 
understand why this didn't matter until now. Maybe you only need to 
explain better the whole point behind the introduced initiator/requester 
functionality.

In any way, could you use spell checker on the commit log (like "conmmand")?

> Signed-off-by: Zhenguo Zhao <Zhenguo.Zhao1@unisoc.com>
> ---
>   drivers/tty/n_gsm.c | 5 +++--
>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c b/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c
> index 5fea02c..e66418b 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c
> @@ -3005,8 +3005,9 @@ static int gsmtty_open(struct tty_struct *tty, struct file *filp)
>   	/* We could in theory open and close before we wait - eg if we get
>   	   a DM straight back. This is ok as that will have caused a hangup */
>   	tty_port_set_initialized(port, 1);
> -	/* Start sending off SABM messages */
> -	gsm_dlci_begin_open(dlci);
> +	/* Start sending off SABM messages for initiator */
> +	if (gsm->initiator)
> +		gsm_dlci_begin_open(dlci);
>   	/* And wait for virtual carrier */
>   	return tty_port_block_til_ready(port, tty, filp);
>   }
> 

thanks,
-- 
js
suse labs