On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 12:03:05AM +0800, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:

On May 8, 2013, at 11:53 PM, Greg KH [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 05:40:57PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:

quoted

On 08:34 Wed 08 May     , Greg KH wrote:

quoted

On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:34:43PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

quoted

+#define ASC_MAJOR		204
+#define ASC_MINOR_START		40

I don't know what the current policy is on allocating major/minor numbers,
but I'm sure you cannot just reuse one that is already used.

I agree, why are you trying to create a new tty device name?  Can't you
use the existing ttyS name and minor number as you will not have any
other type of serial device on this system?

Greg on ST STB for more than 10 years we use ttyASC I'll prefer ttySx

For 10+ years you have had an out-of-tree serial driver?

yes ST have it out of tree for very long time even I puts them to come mainline

Crazy...

quoted

 What
major/minor numbers did you use for it?

http://git.stlinux.com/?p=havana/com.st.havana.kernel.git;a=blob;f=drivers/serial/stm-asc.h;h=79e003ffeb21df55a6af94774fc9c4b3d8de18e9;hb=HEAD

  52 #define ASC_MAJOR               204
  53 #define ASC_MINOR_START         40

same as in this patch

Ok, but just because you have been using an out-of-tree name, and
non-reserved major/minor, doesn't mean we have to accept it.  As you are
probably using a tool like udev/devtmpfs on your systems, the
major/minor number shouldn't matter, only the name.

And I'd argue that we should change the name as well.

quoted

quoted

on the DTB SoC you have one one IP present the st,asc

I don't understand, what do you mean by this?

confused,

just mention there is not hardware reason to not use the generic ttySx
in place of ttyAS as we have only one IP that handle serial on this
family of SoC

personally I'll switch to ttySx

Great, then you can use the same major/minor range as well, so there's
no more objection from me about this :)

thanks,

greg k-h