[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b5b99f61-f0f2-4b00-84b5-dde7a6c70ff8@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 06:59:49 +0100
From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@....qualcomm.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] serial: Fix not set tty->port race condition
On 22. 01. 26, 18:11, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 22/01/2026 18:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Revert commit bfc467db60b7 ("serial: remove redundant
>> tty_port_link_device()") because the tty_port_link_device() is not
>
> And grumpy side note because I was looking at this for more than a day
> blaming my new hardware:
>
> I really wish commits (e.g. bfc467db60b7) calling something redundant
> had that much of message written why something is redundant as the
> commit (fb2b90014d78) which introduced that part of code.
It was clear enough: because tty_port_register_device_attr_serdev()
links the port few lines below.
But it/I somehow didn't take the hidden uart_console() in
uart_configure_port() into account.
> If someone wrote one page of text why foo is needed, we should write not
> less why it is not needed :)
I think I could generate a bloat of text. But you will still have a
broken kernel the same way :)?
thanks,
--
js
suse labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists