From: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
To: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-serial@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] TTY/Serial driver fixes for 5.5-rc3
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 11:37:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200110103752.GB4273@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191227183011.ij5wcawu6kpf52fb@debian>
On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 06:30:11PM +0000, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 07:06:51AM -0500, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 10:08:03AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 11:07 PM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The last tty core fix should resolve a long-standing bug with a race
> > > > at port creation time that some people would see, and Sudip finally
> > > > tracked down.
> > >
> > > Hmm, looks good. But it makes me wonder if we should now try to remove
> > > the second call to tty_port_link_device()?
> > >
> > > Now we have a number of helpers that do that tty_port_link_device()
> > > call for the driver (eg tty_port_register_device_attr_serdev(),
> > > tty_port_register_device_attr(), and the just added
> > > uart_add_one_port()).
> > >
> > > But we also have drivers doing it by hand, and presumably we now have
> > > drivers that do it through multiple paths? I guess it's harmless, but
> > > it feels a bit odd. No?
> >
> > It does. I'll try to look at this after the holidays unless Sudip beats
> > me to it.
>
> The second call to tty_port_link_device() is in
> tty_port_register_device_attr_serdev() and tty_port_register_device_attr()
> is being called from many other places apart from uart_add_one_port().
> The attached patch should be safe. I will test and send it properly unless
> someone objects to it.
No, this is horrid. There's certainly room for some clean up here but we
shouldn't make things worse. ;)
Why not look into registering the console only after the port has been
set up and registered and revert fb2b90014d78 ("tty: link tty and port
before configuring it as console") completely instead?
Johan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-10 10:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-20 7:07 [GIT PULL] TTY/Serial driver fixes for 5.5-rc3 Greg KH
2019-12-20 18:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-12-23 12:06 ` Greg KH
2019-12-25 12:52 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2019-12-27 18:30 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2020-01-10 10:37 ` Johan Hovold [this message]
2019-12-20 18:15 ` pr-tracker-bot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200110103752.GB4273@localhost \
--to=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jslaby@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).