linux-kernel - Re: [question] De-registration does not remove port

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: <7af6c0a5-c990-5a40-104e-13f44b1cb4c5@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 24 Jun 2021 18:33:01 +0530
From:   Saubhik Mukherjee <saubhik.mukherjee@...il.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     vgupta@...opsys.com, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ldv-project@...uxtesting.org,
        Pavel Andrianov <andrianov@...ras.ru>
Subject: Re: [question] De-registration does not remove port

On 6/23/21 12:44 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 11:42:36AM +0530, Saubhik Mukherjee wrote:
>> In drivers/tty/serial/arc_uart.c, arc_serial_remove always returns 0,
>> instead of calling uart_remove_one_port to remove uart port from serial
>> core. The comment says "This will be never be called". In my understanding,
>> a port added using uart_add_one_port should be removed during
>> de-registration.
>>
>> Is there a reason for this behavior?
> 
> Did you test the code to see if that function will ever be called?

I would like to reformulate the question: Suppose arc_serial_remove is 
never called. Then I would like to know how the driver de-registration 
is organized since the UART port is never removed?