[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250814072456.182853-3-jirislaby@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2025 09:24:42 +0200
From: "Jiri Slaby (SUSE)" <jirislaby@...nel.org>
To: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc: linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Jiri Slaby (SUSE)" <jirislaby@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 02/16] tty: introduce tty_port_tty guard()
Having this, guards like these work:
scoped_guard(tty_port_tty, port)
tty_wakeup(scoped_tty());
See e.g. "tty_port: use scoped_guard()" later in this series.
The definitions depend on CONFIG_TTY. It's due to tty_kref_put().
On !CONFIG_TTY, it is an inline and its declaration would conflict. The
guards are not needed in that case, of course.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby (SUSE) <jirislaby@...nel.org>
---
include/linux/tty_port.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/linux/tty_port.h b/include/linux/tty_port.h
index 332ddb93603e..660c254f1efe 100644
--- a/include/linux/tty_port.h
+++ b/include/linux/tty_port.h
@@ -270,4 +270,18 @@ static inline void tty_port_tty_vhangup(struct tty_port *port)
__tty_port_tty_hangup(port, false, false);
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_TTY
+void tty_kref_put(struct tty_struct *tty);
+__DEFINE_CLASS_IS_CONDITIONAL(tty_port_tty, true);
+__DEFINE_UNLOCK_GUARD(tty_port_tty, struct tty_struct, tty_kref_put(_T->lock));
+static inline class_tty_port_tty_t class_tty_port_tty_constructor(struct tty_port *tport)
+{
+ class_tty_port_tty_t _t = {
+ .lock = tty_port_tty_get(tport),
+ };
+ return _t;
+}
+#define scoped_tty() ((struct tty_struct *)(__guard_ptr(tty_port_tty)(&scope)))
+#endif
+
#endif
--
2.50.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists