linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6] uartclk value from serial

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5048F161.3000805@suse.cz>
Date:	Thu, 06 Sep 2012 20:54:25 +0200
From:	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
To:	Tomas Hlavacek <tmshlvck@...il.com>
CC:	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, alan@...ux.intel.com,
	linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	marek.vasut@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] uartclk value from serial_core exposed to sysfs

On 09/06/2012 08:39 PM, Tomas Hlavacek wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz> wrote:
>> On 09/06/2012 03:17 AM, Tomas Hlavacek wrote:
>>> @@ -2362,8 +2392,8 @@ int uart_add_one_port(struct uart_driver *drv, struct uart_port *uport)
>>>        * Register the port whether it's detected or not.  This allows
>>>        * setserial to be used to alter this ports parameters.
>>>        */
>>> -     tty_dev = tty_port_register_device(port, drv->tty_driver, uport->line,
>>> -                     uport->dev);
>>> +     tty_dev = tty_register_device_attr(drv->tty_driver, uport->line,
>>> +                     uport->dev, port, tty_dev_attr_groups);
>>
>> This makes me believe you have not tested the change at all?
> 
> Thanks! I can't believe I missed that. (And I actually tested that,
> but I have to admit that it was not enough apparently.)
> 
> I will re-send the patch (after some additional testing and double-checking).

Ok. A couple more questions...

* why are you passing tty_port to the struct device's private data and
not uart_port proper? Is this for some future use?
* cannot be all those attribute structs const?
* kdoc for tty_register_device_attr says that when
TTY_DRIVER_DYNAMIC_DEV is not set, tty_register_device_attr *should* not
be called. But it must not be called, otherwise it will fail and emit a
warning as a bonus, right?
* final remark. I would prefer declaration and code be delimited by a
new line in uart_get_attr_uartclk:
<===>
+       int ret;
+
+       struct tty_port *port = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
+       struct uart_state *state = container_of(port, struct uart_state,
port);
+       mutex_lock(&state->port.mutex);
<===>

Like:
<===>
  struct tty_port *port = ...;
  struct uart_state *state = ...;
  int ret;

  mutex_lock(&state->port.mutex);
<===>

regards,
-- 
js
suse labs
--
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/