Re: [PATCH v7 5/6] serial: Support for RS-485 multipoint addresses

Jiri Slaby
2022-06-16T05:49:08Z

On 16. 06. 22, 7:04, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2022, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 03:48:28PM +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
>>> Add support for RS-485 multipoint addressing using 9th bit [*]. The
>>> addressing mode is configured through .rs485_config().
>>>
>>> ADDRB in termios indicates 9th bit addressing mode is enabled. In this
>>> mode, 9th bit is used to indicate an address (byte) within the
>>> communication line. ADDRB can only be enabled/disabled through
>>> .rs485_config() that is also responsible for setting the destination and
>>> receiver (filter) addresses.
>>>
>>> [*] Technically, RS485 is just an electronic spec and does not itself
>>> specify the 9th bit addressing mode but 9th bit seems at least
>>> "semi-standard" way to do addressing with RS485.
>>>
>>> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>> Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
>>> Cc: linux-api@vger.kernel.org
>>> Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
>>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>>> Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
>>
>> Hmm... In order to reduce commit messages you can move these Cc:s after the
>> cutter line ('---').
>
> Ok, although the toolchain I use didn't support preserving --- content
> so I had to create hack to preserve them, hopefully nothing backfires due
> to the hack. :-)
>
>>> - __u32 padding[5]; /* Memory is cheap, new structs
>>> - are a royal PITA .. */
>>> + __u8 addr_recv;
>>> + __u8 addr_dest;
>>> + __u8 padding[2 + 4 * sizeof(__u32)]; /* Memory is cheap, new structs
>>> + * are a royal PITA .. */
>>
>> I'm not sure it's an equivalent. I would leave u32 members untouched, so
>> something like
>>
>> __u8 addr_recv;
>> __u8 addr_dest;
>> __u8 padding0[2]; /* Memory is cheap, new structs
>> __u32 padding1[4]; * are a royal PITA .. */
>>
>> And repeating about `pahole` tool which may be useful here to check for ABI
>> potential changes.
>
> I cannot take __u32 padding[] away like that, this is an uapi header.

Yeah, but it's padding after all. I would personally break it for
example as Andy suggests (if pahole shows no differences in size on both
32/64 bit) and wait if something breaks. To be honest, I'd not expect
anyone to touch it. And if someone does, we would fix it somehow and
they should too...

thanks,
--
js
suse labs