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 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> From: Amar Subramanyam <[email protected]>
>
> Signed-off-by: Amar Subramanyam <[email protected]>
> ---
> 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
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
_______________________________________________
Linuxptp-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
