I wonder if it might not be a good idea to wrap these 3 cases in #ifdefs: #ifdef B230400 case 230400: baud = B230400; break; #endif #ifdef B460800 case 460800: baud = B460800; break; #endif #ifdef B921600 case 921600: baud = B921600; break; #endif I mention this because in the kernel we use (4.4.8-armada-17.02.2) I find in .../drivers/tty/tty_ioctl.c that these rates are protected by "#ifndef __sparc__". I don't know if anyone much cares about supporting Sparc any more but...
-michael On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 4:08 AM <amarnagendr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > From: Amar Subramanyam <amarnagendr...@gmail.com> > > Signed-off-by: Amar Subramanyam <amarnagendr...@gmail.com> > --- > serial.c | 9 +++++++++ > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/serial.c b/serial.c > index 29cef0c..e1be165 100644 > --- a/serial.c > +++ b/serial.c > @@ -89,6 +89,15 @@ int serial_open(const char *name, int bps, int icrnl, int > hwfc) > case 115200: > baud = B115200; > break; > + case 230400: > + baud = B230400; > + break; > + case 460800: > + baud = B460800; > + break; > + case 921600: > + baud = B921600; > + break; > default: > return -1; > } > -- > 2.25.1 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Linuxptp-devel mailing list > Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel