linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] TTY/Serial driver fixes for 5.5-rc3

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Fri, 20 Dec 2019 10:08:03 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
Cc:     Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] TTY/Serial driver fixes for 5.5-rc3

On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 11:07 PM Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.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?

            Linus