Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 17 Jan 2017 14:57:29 +0000 | From | One Thousand Gnomes <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 2/9] tty_port: allow a port to be opened with a tty that has no file handle |
| |
On Mon, 16 Jan 2017 16:54:29 -0600 Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
> From: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com> > > Let us create tty objects entirely in kernel space. Untested proposal to > show why all the ideas around rewriting half the uart stack are not needed. > > With this a kernel created non file backed tty object could be used to handle > data, and set terminal modes. Not all ldiscs can cope with this as N_TTY in > particular has to work back to the fs/tty layer. > > The tty_port code is however otherwise clean of file handles as far as I can > tell as is the low level tty port write path used by the ldisc, the > configuration low level interfaces and most of the ldiscs. > > Currently you don't have any exposure to see tty hangups because those are > built around the file layer. However a) it's a fixed port so you probably > don't care about that b) if you do we can add a callback and c) you almost > certainly don't want the userspace tear down/rebuild behaviour anyway. > > This should however be sufficient if we wanted for example to enumerate all > the bluetooth bound fixed ports via ACPI and make them directly available. > It doesn't deal with the case of a user opening a port that's also kernel > opened and that would need some locking out (so it returned EBUSY if bound > to a kernel device of some kind). That needs resolving along with how you > "up" or "down" your new bluetooth device, or enumerate it while providing > the existing tty API to avoid regressions (and to debug). > > Alan > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> > Reviewed-By: Sebastian Reichel <sre@kernel.org> > --- > Alan, Need your SoB here.
Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Alan
| |