From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oliver Neukum Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 4/5] usb: cdc-acm: Enable serdev support Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2019 14:48:26 +0100 Message-ID: <1546868906.3037.37.camel@suse.com> References: <20190104112131.14451-1-afaerber@suse.de> <20190104112131.14451-5-afaerber@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20190104112131.14451-5-afaerber@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Andreas =?ISO-8859-1?Q?F=E4rber?= , linux-lpwan@lists.infradead.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org Cc: Johan Hovold , Rob Herring , Greg Kroah-Hartman , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Fr, 2019-01-04 at 12:21 +0100, Andreas Färber wrote: > Switch from tty_port_register_device() to tty_port_register_device_serdev() > and from tty_unregister_device() to tty_port_unregister_device(). > > On removal of a serdev driver sometimes count mismatch warnings were seen: > > ttyACM ttyACM0: tty_hangup: tty->count(1) != (#fd's(0) + #kopen's(0)) > ttyACM ttyACM0: tty_port_close_start: tty->count = 1 port count = 0 > > Note: The serdev drivers appear to probe asynchronously as soon as they > are registered. Should the USB quirks in probe be moved before registration? > No noticeable difference for the devices at hand. That is quite drastic a change. Johan, how complete in terms of features is serdev? Are you refering to CLEAR_HALT_CONDITIONS in terms of quirks? Regards Oliver