[PATCH v1] tty: baudrate: Synchronise baud_table[] and baud_bits[]

[PATCH v1] tty: baudrate: Synchronise baud_table[] and baud_bits[]

[Andy Shevchenko]

Synchronize baud rate tables for better readability.
No functional change intended.

Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
---
 drivers/tty/tty_baudrate.c | 24 +++++++++---------------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/tty/tty_baudrate.c b/drivers/tty/tty_baudrate.c
index f438eaa68246..eb6b07f079c8 100644
--- a/drivers/tty/tty_baudrate.c
+++ b/drivers/tty/tty_baudrate.c
@@ -17,8 +17,8 @@
  * include/asm/termbits.h file.
  */
 static const speed_t baud_table[] = {
-	0, 50, 75, 110, 134, 150, 200, 300, 600, 1200, 1800, 2400, 4800,
-	9600, 19200, 38400, 57600, 115200, 230400, 460800,
+	0, 50, 75, 110, 134, 150, 200, 300, 600, 1200, 1800, 2400,
+	4800, 9600, 19200, 38400, 57600, 115200, 230400, 460800,
 #ifdef __sparc__
 	76800, 153600, 307200, 614400, 921600
 #else
@@ -27,22 +27,16 @@ static const speed_t baud_table[] = {
 #endif
 };
 
-#ifndef __sparc__
 static const tcflag_t baud_bits[] = {
-	B0, B50, B75, B110, B134, B150, B200, B300, B600,
-	B1200, B1800, B2400, B4800, B9600, B19200, B38400,
-	B57600, B115200, B230400, B460800, B500000, B576000,
-	B921600, B1000000, B1152000, B1500000, B2000000, B2500000,
-	B3000000, B3500000, B4000000
-};
+	B0, B50, B75, B110, B134, B150, B200, B300, B600, B1200, B1800, B2400,
+	B4800, B9600, B19200, B38400, B57600, B115200, B230400, B460800,
+#ifdef __sparc__
+	B76800, B153600, B307200, B614400, B921600
 #else
-static const tcflag_t baud_bits[] = {
-	B0, B50, B75, B110, B134, B150, B200, B300, B600,
-	B1200, B1800, B2400, B4800, B9600, B19200, B38400,
-	B57600, B115200, B230400, B460800, B76800, B153600,
-	B307200, B614400, B921600
-};
+	B500000, B576000, B921600, B1000000, B1152000, B1500000, B2000000,
+	B2500000, B3000000, B3500000, B4000000
 #endif
+};
 
 static int n_baud_table = ARRAY_SIZE(baud_table);
 
-- 
2.24.1

Re: [PATCH v1] tty: baudrate: Synchronise baud_table[] and baud_bits[]

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 07:09:17PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> Synchronize baud rate tables for better readability.

"Synchronize"?  With what?  Why?  I'm all for cleaning up code, but this
just seems totally gratuitous.

We have whole serial drivers with _THOUSANDS_ of checkpatch issues, and
this is bothering you?  :)

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH v1] tty: baudrate: Synchronise baud_table[] and baud_bits[]

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 06:27:56PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 07:09:17PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Synchronize baud rate tables for better readability.
> 
> "Synchronize"?  With what?

Between each other. This SPARC thingy makes it's harder to follow.

> Why?  I'm all for cleaning up code, but this
> just seems totally gratuitous.

Btw, while doing it I found that SPARC actually supports more baud rates than
defined in those arrays. Without this patch I would not (easily) notice that.
Should I also attach another patch and resend?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v1] tty: baudrate: Synchronise baud_table[] and baud_bits[]

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 06:33:27PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 06:27:56PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 07:09:17PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > Synchronize baud rate tables for better readability.
> > 
> > "Synchronize"?  With what?
> 
> Between each other. This SPARC thingy makes it's harder to follow.

Ok, be more specific please, a better changelog is key here.

> > Why?  I'm all for cleaning up code, but this
> > just seems totally gratuitous.
> 
> Btw, while doing it I found that SPARC actually supports more baud rates than
> defined in those arrays. Without this patch I would not (easily) notice that.
> Should I also attach another patch and resend?

Yes, that might justify this patch's acceptance :)

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH v1] tty: baudrate: Synchronise baud_table[] and baud_bits[]

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 06:21:06PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 06:33:27PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 06:27:56PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 07:09:17PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > Synchronize baud rate tables for better readability.
> > > 
> > > "Synchronize"?  With what?
> > 
> > Between each other. This SPARC thingy makes it's harder to follow.
> 
> Ok, be more specific please, a better changelog is key here.
> 
> > > Why?  I'm all for cleaning up code, but this
> > > just seems totally gratuitous.
> > 
> > Btw, while doing it I found that SPARC actually supports more baud rates than
> > defined in those arrays. Without this patch I would not (easily) notice that.
> > Should I also attach another patch and resend?
> 
> Yes, that might justify this patch's acceptance :)

Done in v2.


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko