Re: [PATCH 0/9] tty: tty_struct dependency clean-ups
From: One Thousand Gnomes
Date: Mon Sep 12 2016 - 07:47:22 EST
On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 22:05:07 -0500
Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 4:14 PM, One Thousand Gnomes
> <gnomes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 17:37:01 -0500
> > Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> This patch series removes or prepares to remove some of the dependencies
> >> on tty_struct within tty_port drivers. This will allow using tty_ports
> >> directly for so called UART slave devices.
> > You can create a tty_struct kernel side with the two tiny changes I
> > posted before. Why do you want to do invasive tree wide changes when you
> > can do simple ones ?
> Well, I don't want to do invasive changes, but I thought the idea was
> to use tty_port struct without a tty_struct.
I posted some tiny patches to break the file/tty requirement in the base
tty code for comment a while ago and they were very tiny for most ldiscs
(n_tty unsurprisingly wouldn't work this way but does anyone need kernel
mode n_tty ?)
Moving termios into the tty_port is IMHO a good thing to do whichever
approach is taken.
> I was planning to keep termios out of tty_port and make clients of
> tty_port carry it if for nothing else not quite understanding all the
> details around the lifetime, init and locking of it. If there's always
> a tty_struct then there's not much point moving it other than which
> struct makes more sense. But that would cause some churn.
The termios lifetime is the lifetime of the port, although it may get
reset at some times.