Re: [PATCH v6] uartclk value from serial_core exposed to sysfs

[Jiri Slaby]

On 09/06/2012 09:41 PM, Tomas Hlavacek wrote:
>> * why are you passing tty_port to the struct device's private data and
>> not uart_port proper? Is this for some future use?
> 
> I actually used the uart_port structure in older RFC versions of the
> patch. Alan Cox advised to use struct tty_port because of consistency.
> More precisely he said (in an e-mail from Aug 12):
> 
> I'd rather however it pointed
> to the tty_port that each tty device has (or very soon will be required
> to have).

Yes, this is already a requirement in tty-next. And every driver has to
provide us with the tty_port as you might persuaded yourself of that
already ;).

> You can still find the uart_foo structs from that but it means
> we can do the dev_set_drvdata() in a consistent manner for all tty
> devices in the kernel. That in turn means we can make some of the sysfs
> valid the same way.

Ah, OK, makes sense.

>> * cannot be all those attribute structs const?
> 
> It seems that making
> 
> static const struct attribute *tty_dev_attrs[] = ...
> 
> produces warning:
> 
> drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c:2334:2: warning: initialization from
> incompatible pointer type [enabled by default]
> drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c:2334:2: warning: (near initialization
> for âtty_dev_attr_group.attrsâ) [enabled by default]
> 
> But others can. I am going to make them const in following patch.

Ok, it was only a suggestion. I did not know either.

regards,
-- 
js
suse labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/