On Sun, Oct 6, 2019 at 6:21 AM Yegor Yefremov
<yegorsli...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Adam,
>
> On Sun, Oct 6, 2019 at 4:33 AM Adam Ford <aford...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > There are two checks to see if the manual gpio is configured, but
> > these the check is seeing if the structure is NULL instead it
> > should check to see if there are CTS and/or RTS pins defined.
> >
> > This patch uses checks for those individual pins instead of
> > checking for the structure itself.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Adam Ford <aford...@gmail.com>
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_omap.c
> > b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_omap.c
> > index c68e2b3a1634..836e736ae188 100644
> > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_omap.c
> > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_omap.c
> > @@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ static void omap8250_set_mctrl(struct uart_port *port,
> > unsigned int mctrl)
> >
> > serial8250_do_set_mctrl(port, mctrl);
> >
> > - if (!up->gpios) {
> > + if (!mctrl_gpio_to_gpiod(up->gpios, UART_GPIO_RTS)) {
> > /*
> > * Turn off autoRTS if RTS is lowered and restore autoRTS
> > * setting if RTS is raised
> > @@ -456,7 +456,8 @@ static void omap_8250_set_termios(struct uart_port
> > *port,
> > up->port.status &= ~(UPSTAT_AUTOCTS | UPSTAT_AUTORTS |
> > UPSTAT_AUTOXOFF);
> >
> > if (termios->c_cflag & CRTSCTS && up->port.flags & UPF_HARD_FLOW &&
> > - !up->gpios) {
> > + !mctrl_gpio_to_gpiod(up->gpios, UART_GPIO_RTS) &&
> > + !mctrl_gpio_to_gpiod(up->gpios, UART_GPIO_CTS)) {
> > /* Enable AUTOCTS (autoRTS is enabled when RTS is raised) */
> > up->port.status |= UPSTAT_AUTOCTS | UPSTAT_AUTORTS;
> > priv->efr |= UART_EFR_CTS;
>
> Looks good to me but !up->gpios must remain as otherwise, we will get
> NULL pointer dereference. What do you think?
I was not seeing up->gpios ever NULL so the contents inside the check
never was executed. When I removed the check, the performance came
back. I looked at examples on how other devices checked for RTS and
CTS, and I noticed that the Atmel serial driver did something like the
above.
>
> Also adding some more people who can be interested in testing this approach.
I am open for ideas. If something is better, but something is either
incorrectly setting up->gpios to non-NULL or the check for non-NULL is
wrong.
adam
>
> Cheers,
> Yegor
