On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 22:05:07 -0500
Rob Herring [off-list ref] wrote:

On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 4:14 PM, One Thousand Gnomes
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Fri,  9 Sep 2016 17:37:01 -0500
Rob Herring [off-list ref] wrote:
 

quoted

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.

Alan