On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 05:06:24PM +0200, Thomas Pfaff wrote: > > On Wed, 9 Apr 2014, One Thousand Gnomes wrote: > > > On Wed, 9 Apr 2014 13:22:14 +0200 > > Thomas Pfaff <tpf...@pcs.com> wrote: > > > > > 1. uart_change_pm ist called during uart_open and calls the uart pm > > > function > > > without checking for PORT_UNKNOWN. > > > > Removing this breaks other parts of the code assume that the port will be > > powered up (notably setserial paths). So it makes sense that > > uart_change_pm for a "none" port is a no-op but needs logic in the > > setserial path to power up a port when we move none->known and power it > > down on known->none > > > > Then why not move uart_change_pm into uart_port_startup, where it will be > called > when needed ? > A reworked patch is below. > > > > 2. uart_shutdown is called from uart_set_info and does not check it > > > either. > > > > I don't see why this one matters. We would have done > > > > uart_startup > > uart_port_startup > > uport->type == PORT_UNKNOWN > > return 1; > > ASYNCB_INITIALIZED is not set > > > > uart_shutdown > > ASYNCB_INITIALISED is not set > > Skip call to uart_port_shutdown > > > > So that code looks correct to me. > > I agree, i have overlooked this. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Pfaff <tpf...@pcs.com>
Can you resend this in a format that I can apply this in? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
