From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.29]:38062 "EHLO out5-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751836AbbJLJTQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Oct 2015 05:19:16 -0400 Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id C42DE20512 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 05:19:15 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <561B7B01.40309@imap.cc> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 11:18:57 +0200 From: Tilman Schmidt MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Bolle CC: Peter Hurley , Jiri Slaby , "stable@vger.kernel.org" , Linux kernel mailing list , "David S. Miller" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.12 16/33] isdn/gigaset: reset tty->receive_room when attaching ser_gigaset References: <350624fa32cb152bfec51f236b0b62b8d480a05a.1442326825.git.jslaby@suse.cz> <4a187391f4c7d54b9c07eed08de48ffd6e0a3f20.1442326825.git.jslaby@suse.cz> <55F8B9D9.5060201@imap.cc> <55F951EA.1060001@imap.cc> <55FC05C7.1000207@imap.cc> <5600028B.4050904@hurleysoftware.com> <56002B48.7090008@imap.cc> <1444165247.2417.74.camel@tiscali.nl> In-Reply-To: <1444165247.2417.74.camel@tiscali.nl> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="GJJkL4pSR6UwmfC0bU4muwVsoRuCjrx2q" Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --GJJkL4pSR6UwmfC0bU4muwVsoRuCjrx2q Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Paul, Am 06.10.2015 um 23:00 schrieb Paul Bolle: > On ma, 2015-09-21 at 18:07 +0200, Tilman Schmidt wrote: >> Am 21.09.2015 um 15:13 schrieb Peter Hurley: >>> ??? >>> >>> The tool you authored will do it from the command line >>> >>> $ ldattach PPP /dev/ttyS1 >>> $ ldattach GIGASET_M101 /dev/ttyS1 >>> >>> Note that nothing here closes the serial device 'in between', and >>> the tty core has switched directly from PPP to GIGASET_M101. >>> n_tty->receive_room is now 64K. >> >> Indeed it does. I stand corrected. The possibility of running ldattach= a >> second time without terminating the first instance didn't occur to me.= >=20 > Naive question: when would running ldattach a second time make sense? Peter's argument wasn't about making sense, but about operator error. While it doesn't make any sense indeed to run two instances of ldattach in parallel on one and the same serial port, it is entirely conceivable that someone might do so inadvertently, by not being aware that one is running already. Best Regards, Tilman --=20 Tilman Schmidt E-Mail: tilman@imap.cc Bonn, Germany Diese Nachricht besteht zu 100% aus wiederverwerteten Bits. Unge=C3=B6ffnet mindestens haltbar bis: (siehe R=C3=BCckseite) --GJJkL4pSR6UwmfC0bU4muwVsoRuCjrx2q Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJWG3sRAAoJEFPuqx0v+F+qQzAIAJW6KWG3azfpwWyMocHCcBDN UEi10OyJtCXt3LRx0BFuszLj4LAjlWQtSW4HLCu2jxaW92etkT5+MI3PIIgQN8t5 L8o6afYF0hT09bBrzdrHi8owlOwvu1Sw3uLe2wNqZfvzIXvS6ust/z3nrcH2rGAY y0w7e19UXJNWEtsd2y/bA8lveRxU3xZwoCWpeTmSX2c60MMd7u+VelTbeJtZEp0j AJfyZGoezqB40fFdKBIQxAOlbUSMvtTW0M1piCsEKTj6jcDQw6E0q5EVsvAOMfy6 GoLkRdqCM3BlBMflDFKi3NoOco+9e4w6BqO4fmOYeIbPLTJUYCfAIXV5QANtSWc= =ucsY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --GJJkL4pSR6UwmfC0bU4muwVsoRuCjrx2q--