FTDI USB-to-UART converters and tcdrain()

2012-10-02 Thread Jarkko Huijts
lemented for this device? - Or has ioctl TIOCSERGETLSR perhaps become the standard to do this for USB UART devices? Thank you in advance for your help. Kind regards, Jarkko Huijts -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majo

Re: FTDI USB-to-UART converters and tcdrain()

2012-10-09 Thread Jarkko Huijts
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:25 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > - Is tcdrain() supposed to ensure that all TX data has been sent for any > > serial device? If so, why is it not implemented for this device? > > No one has implemented it to do so. Other usb-serial drivers have > implemented this functionalit

Re: FTDI USB-to-UART converters and tcdrain()

2012-10-10 Thread Jarkko Huijts
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 07:59 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 12:21:56PM +0200, Jarkko Huijts wrote: > > I have e-mailed FTDI's support to ask whether the assumptions described > > above are true and whether there is no register to read the actual > > amou

[PATCH v3.6.1] usb: serial: ftdi_sio: Add missing chars_in_buffer function

2012-10-10 Thread Jarkko Huijts
From: Jarkko Huijts The driver does not wait until the hardware buffer (for data from the PC to the UART line) is drained when tcdrain or close is called in an application. Solution: Implement a chars_in_buffer function that checks both the software and hardware buffer. If the TEMT (TX empty

Re: FTDI USB-to-UART converters and tcdrain()

2012-10-11 Thread Jarkko Huijts
On Thu, 2012-10-11 at 04:57 +0900, Greg KH wrote: > The patch looks great, thanks so much for doing this. I'll queue it up > after 3.7-rc1 is released by Linus (which should be in a few days). No problem. It's pretty cool to be able to contribute. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

Re: FTDI USB-to-UART converters and tcdrain()

2012-10-15 Thread Jarkko Huijts
On Sat, 2012-10-13 at 17:33 +0200, Johan Hovold wrote: > Thanks for the patch Jarkko. Your solution is nice, but I think it could > implemented in a slightly better way. > > For starters, the subdrivers really shouldn't be poking around in the > generic driver's implementation details unless reall