Re: [PATCH 1/4] tty: Drop tty->count on tty_reopen() failure

From: Jiri Slaby
Date: Fri Aug 31 2018 - 02:47:35 EST

On 08/29/2018, 06:13 PM, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
>> I would just do:
>> if (!retval)
>> tty->count++;
>> here. Nobody from ldiscs should rely on tty->count.
> I thought about that and probably should have described in commit
> message why I haven't done that: I prefer to keep it as was as I did Cc
> stable tree - to keep the chance of regression to minimum.
> I agree that your way is cleaner, but probably it may be done as
> cleanup on top for linux-next..

Agreed, so care to cook it up as 5/4 in this series :)?

suse labs