> > To be clear I included the patch in this series only because:
> >
> > 1. I couldn't figure out any way to send a serial break to the ARM
> >Foundation Model making it impossible for me to provoke SysRq actions
> >from interrupt context,
>
> Agreed, there's no direct way to do it (anno
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 03:28:37PM +, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> On 20/03/15 14:28, Dave Martin wrote:
> >On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 02:20:22PM +, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> >>Currently the magic SysRq functions can accessed by sending a break on
> >>the serial port. Unfortunately some networked s
On 20/03/15 14:28, Dave Martin wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 02:20:22PM +, Daniel Thompson wrote:
Currently the magic SysRq functions can accessed by sending a break on
the serial port. Unfortunately some networked serial proxies make it
difficult to send a break meaning SysRq functions can
On 19/03/15 22:05, Peter Hurley wrote:
[ + linux-serial ]
Hi Daniel,
I apologize for not reviewing this back in Sept when you first
RFC'd this patch.
No worries.
The original RFC really was a "would anyone else find this useful?"
question and that question seemed to be answered by the absen
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 02:20:22PM +, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> Currently the magic SysRq functions can accessed by sending a break on
> the serial port. Unfortunately some networked serial proxies make it
> difficult to send a break meaning SysRq functions cannot be used. This
> patch provides
[ + linux-serial ]
Hi Daniel,
I apologize for not reviewing this back in Sept when you first
RFC'd this patch.
On 03/18/2015 10:20 AM, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> Currently the magic SysRq functions can accessed by sending a break on
> the serial port. Unfortunately some networked serial proxies m
6 matches
Mail list logo
