On Wed, 2 Aug 2006, Russell King wrote:
>
> Rafael has reported that it fixes his problem, which is great - and is
> the first bit of feedback I've received on it (thanks Rafael.)
>
> I've no idea why it doesn't work for you though.
Well, more importantly, why would we do something like this in the first
place?
Wouldn't it be a _lot_ better to just use the bog-standard
"suspend/resume" callbacks, and let serial drivers just suspend/resume on
their own, instead of having upper layers generate these fake
"set_termios()" calls?
The serial layer should use set_termios() when users set the termios state
(surprise surprise), not to emulate suspend/restore.
Real hardware tends to want to do a lot more _anyway_ for suspend/restore,
so the argument that "set_termios()" already exists as an interface is
pretty bogus.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
