linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] serial: core: restore of

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]

Message-ID: <2025061746-raking-gusto-d1f3@gregkh>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2025 06:44:18 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Aidan Stewart <astewart@...telic.com>
Cc: jirislaby@...nel.org, tony@...mide.com, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] serial: core: restore of_node information in sysfs

On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 10:21:54AM -0600, Aidan Stewart wrote:
> Since in v6.8-rc1, the of_node symlink under tty devices is
> missing. This breaks any udev rules relying on this information.
> 
> Link the of_node information in the serial controller device with the
> parent defined in the device tree. This will also apply to the serial
> device which takes the serial controller as a parent device.
> 
> Fixes: b286f4e87e32 ("serial: core: Move tty and serdev to be children of serial core port device")
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Aidan Stewart <astewart@...telic.com>
> ---
>  drivers/tty/serial/serial_base_bus.c | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/serial_base_bus.c b/drivers/tty/serial/serial_base_bus.c
> index 5d1677f1b651..0e4bf7a3e775 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/serial_base_bus.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/serial_base_bus.c
> @@ -73,6 +73,10 @@ static int serial_base_device_init(struct uart_port *port,
>  	dev->bus = &serial_base_bus_type;
>  	dev->release = release;
>  
> +	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)) {
> +		device_set_of_node_from_dev(dev, parent_dev);
> +	}

Did this pass checkpatch.pl?

And why is the if statement needed?

thanks,

greg k-h