From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <stable-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-ed1-f68.google.com ([209.85.208.68]:43492 "EHLO
        mail-ed1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1727557AbeHaQCK (ORCPT
        <rfc822;stable@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:02:10 -0400
Received: by mail-ed1-f68.google.com with SMTP id z27-v6so8824528edb.10
        for <stable@vger.kernel.org>; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 04:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <1535716498.23560.78.camel@arista.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] tty: Drop tty->count on tty_reopen() failure
From: Dmitry Safonov <dima@arista.com>
To: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net>,
        Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@gmail.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Tan Xiaojun <tanxiaojun@huawei.com>,
        Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>,
        Pasi =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=E4rkk=E4inen?= <pasik@iki.fi>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>,
        Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>, stable@vger.kernel.org
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:54:58 +0100
In-Reply-To: <b6481bae-a5bd-139f-d193-198a02d24bd8@suse.cz>
References: <20180829022353.23568-1-dima@arista.com>
         <20180829022353.23568-2-dima@arista.com>
         <cbedde00-a0f4-6714-f7f4-a180dca15ce0@suse.cz>
         <1535559207.23560.55.camel@arista.com>
         <b6481bae-a5bd-139f-d193-198a02d24bd8@suse.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <stable.vger.kernel.org>

On Fri, 2018-08-31 at 08:47 +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 08/29/2018, 06:13 PM, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
> > > I would just do:
> > >   if (!retval)
> > >     tty->count++;
> > > here. Nobody from ldiscs should rely on tty->count.
> > 
> > I thought about that and probably should have described in commit
> > message why I haven't done that: I prefer to keep it as was as I
> > did Cc
> > stable tree - to keep the chance of regression to minimum.
> > 
> > I agree that your way is cleaner, but probably it may be done as
> > cleanup on top for linux-next..
> 
> Agreed, so care to cook it up as 5/4 in this series :)?

Sure, will resend v2 with that and all tested-by.

-- 
Thanks,
             Dmitry