linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] serial: core: Extract uart_alloc_xmit_buf() and uart_free_xmit

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 16:45:29 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] serial: core: Extract uart_alloc_xmit_buf() and
 uart_free_xmit_buf()

On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 11:04:35AM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 09. 04. 24, 19:40, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

..

> I see very much of tty_port_alloc_xmit_buf() and tty_port_free_xmit_buf() in
> here :).

A-ha!

> Currently, different locks are used, so the patch is, I think, good for now.
> For future, we should switch to the tty port helpers.

Sure, but I'm not familiar with TTY.

> Actually have you looked if the different locking is an issue at all? IOW,
> isn't the tty_port's (and its xmit buf) lifetime enough w/o uart port locks?

Nope. I only looked at spin lock differences (irq/irqsave) and decided that
irqsave variant is good for both cases.

..

So, do I need to do anything or is it good to go as-is?
Thanks for review.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko