Re: [PATCH V2 1/1] serial: 8250_pci: add RS485 for F81504/508/512

2015-07-29 Thread Jakub Kiciński
On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 11:59:24 +0800, Peter Hung wrote: > Add RS485 control for Fintek F81504/508/512 > > F81504/508/512 can control their RTS with H/W mode. > PCI configuration space for each port is 0x40 + idx * 8 + 7. > > When it set with 0x01, it's configured with RS232 mode. > RTS is controlle

Re: [PATCH 1/1] serial: 8250_pci: add RS485 for F81504/508/512

2015-07-25 Thread Jakub Kiciński
On Fri, 24 Jul 2015 13:55:39 +0800, Peter Hung wrote: > Add RS485 control for Fintek F81504/508/512 > > F81504/508/512 can control their RTS with H/W mode. > PCI configuration space for each port is 0x40 + idx * 8 + 7. > > When it set with 0x01, it's configured with RS232 mode. > RTS is controlle

Re: [PATCH linux-next 1/4] ARM: at91/dt: add new DT properties for Atmel usart

2015-06-04 Thread Jakub Kiciński
On Tue, 2 Jun 2015 16:18:21 +0200, Cyrille Pitchen wrote: > +- atmel,rts-low-threshold: when the RX FIFO level, ie the number of data > + available to be read from the RX FIFO, crosses down this threshold the RTS > + line is driven to low level to tell the remote peer that it can (re)start > + s

Re: [PATCH 3/3] tty: serial: fsl_lpuart: Add support for RS-485

2015-05-29 Thread Jakub Kiciński
On Fri, 29 May 2015 13:35:54 +0530, Bhuvanchandra DV wrote: > Enable Vybrid's build-in support for RS-485 auto RTS for > controlling line direction of RS-485 transceiver driver. > > Signed-off-by: Bhuvanchandra DV > --- > drivers/tty/serial/fsl_lpuart.c | 60 > ++

Re: [PATCH 2/3] tty: serial: fsl_lpuart: remove RTS/CTS control from set/get_mctrl

2015-05-29 Thread Jakub Kiciński
On Fri, 29 May 2015 13:35:53 +0530, Bhuvanchandra DV wrote: > The LPUART does not provide manual control of RTS/CTS signals, > those can only be controlled by the hardware directly. Therefore > manual control of those signals through mctrl can not be provided. > The current implementation enables/d

Re: [PATCH v2] sc16is7xx: spi interface is added

2015-05-14 Thread Jakub Kiciński
On Thu, 14 May 2015 14:45:47 +0530, ram kiran wrote: > > I know little about kbuild but I'm worried that someone doing oldconfig > > can still get SERIAL_SC16IS7XX selected while saying no to all the > > others. > > > > Other option would be to swap the names between SERIAL_SC16IS7XX and > > SERIAL

Re: [PATCH v2] sc16is7xx: spi interface is added

2015-05-14 Thread Jakub Kiciński
On Thu, 14 May 2015 14:45:47 +0530, ram kiran wrote: > > I know little about kbuild but I'm worried that someone doing oldconfig > > can still get SERIAL_SC16IS7XX selected while saying no to all the > > others. > > > > Other option would be to swap the names between SERIAL_SC16IS7XX and > > SERIAL

Re: [PATCH v2] sc16is7xx: spi interface is added

2015-05-14 Thread Jakub Kiciński
On Thu, 14 May 2015 13:16:20 +0530, ram kiran wrote: > > On Wed, 13 May 2015 16:27:58 +0530, ram.i hcltech wrote: > >> spi interface for sc16is7xx is added along with Kconfig flag > >> to enable spi or i2c, thus in a instance we can have either > >> spi or i2c or both, in sync to the hw. > >> > >>

Re: [PATCH v2] sc16is7xx: spi interface is added

2015-05-13 Thread Jakub Kiciński
On Wed, 13 May 2015 16:27:58 +0530, ram.i hcltech wrote: > spi interface for sc16is7xx is added along with Kconfig flag > to enable spi or i2c, thus in a instance we can have either > spi or i2c or both, in sync to the hw. > > Signed-off-by: ram.i hcltech > --- > > Changes in v2: > -Added sepra

Re: [PATCH] rt2x00: BUG: remove double loop on REGISTER_BUSY_COUNT

2014-04-04 Thread Jakub Kiciński
On Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:19:09 +0200, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 05:37:01PM +0200, Jakub Kiciński wrote: > > On Thu, 3 Apr 2014 16:12:07 +0200, Richard Genoud wrote: > > > rt2x00usb_register_read_lock() calls rt2x00usb_vendor_req_buff_lock(

Re: [PATCH] rt2x00: BUG: remove double loop on REGISTER_BUSY_COUNT

2014-04-03 Thread Jakub Kiciński
On Thu, 3 Apr 2014 16:12:07 +0200, Richard Genoud wrote: > rt2x00usb_register_read_lock() calls rt2x00usb_vendor_req_buff_lock() > that calls rt2x00usb_vendor_request() which is already looping up to > REGISTER_BUSY_COUNT times. > > So this loop is not needed. Not true. rt2x00usb_vendor_request