On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 at 19:25, Greg KH wrote:

None of those datasheets really help as they do not describe exactly how to set the baud rates (or much anything else), so we can't rely on them at all, sorry.

Come on, the configuration values for the documented baud rates are exactly the 32bit integer representation of the rate itself, and the reverse-engineered driver knows how to set them. So why should setting the baud rate be different for non-standard rates on devices where the datasheet says that arbitrary rates are supported by the hardware and only need driver customisation? Let alone the fact that my (admittedly limited) testing showed that it works exactly this way.

But still, if the worst thing that might happen when an invalid data rate is selected is that 9600 baud is used instead, I'd prefer that over a driver that by trying to be clever keeps me from using data rates that my hardware would perfectly support.

But we don't know if your hardware supports that, that's the problem.

You don't need to know. If the hardware supports it, it'll work. If not, it'll fall back to 9600. Still better than rounding, IMHO.

Things would of course be different if setting unsupported baud rates caused the hardware to crash, but I think there is no indication of this being the case for any member of the PL2303 family.

We have no idea what happens if you try to do this on old devices, do you?

The driver did not have this limitation at a time when probably more old devices were around than there are today. Did you ever receive a report of a device that crashed on a non-standard baud rate?

Why not just go buy a device that we know works properly, instead of doing these guessing games?

Well, by that argument you maybe shouldn't have started this driver at first place. ;)

cu
        Reinhard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to