[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <OF87B1346C.1E63B3D8-ON85257546.0006F3DA-85257546.000CF300@perle.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 21:16:58 -0500
From: bmckinlay@...le.com
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 60/80] tty: extract the pty init time special cases
My question/comment is in regards to the following patch indicated below
that was posted on October 13, 2008.
> From Alan Cox <>
> Subject [PATCH 60/80] tty: extract the pty init time special cases
> Date Mon, 13 Oct 2008 10:42:39 +0100
>
> From: Alan Cox <alan@...hat.com>
>
> The majority of the remaining init_dev code is pty special cases. We
> refactor this code into the driver->install method.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@...hat.com>
> ---
> drivers/char/pty.c | 126 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> drivers/char/tty_io.c | 198
+++++++++++++++++--------------------------------
> include/linux/tty.h | 5 +
> 3 files changed, 187 insertions(+), 142 deletions(-)
>
This patch seems to break any other pseudo tty drivers, (ie driver->type
==TTY_DRIVER_TYPE_PTY) since not all the tty functions needed for the
driver's new driver->install method are exported from tty_io.c. The
function symbols that need to be exported from /drivers/char/tty_io.c are
the following:
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(alloc_tty_struct);
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(free_tty_struct);
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tty_init_termios);
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(initialize_tty_struct);
I've added these lines and recompiled a 2.6.28 kernel along with adding
new driver->install methods to my master and slave pseudo tty driver and
it seems to work fine now.
Before I go ahead and post a patch, does anyone see any problems with
this?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists