Skip to contentSkip to conversation

tty/n_gsm.c: use gsm->num to remove mux itself from gsm_mux[]

PATCH RESEND In review xinhui 2 participants 2 messages Jul 14, 2016 – Aug 31, 2016 TTY layer and serial drivers

lore
Share & tools
lore

xinhui

author
#0 lore raw

PATCH RESEND v2 1/1 tty/n_gsm.c: use gsm->num to remove mux itself from gsm_mux[]

From: Pan Xinhui <[email protected]>

There is one filed gsm->num to store mux's index of gsm_mux[]. So use gsm->num to remove itself from gsm_mux[] instead of the for-loop traverse in gsm_cleanup_mux().

Signed-off-by Pan Xinhui <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by Alan Cox <[email protected]>

---
change from V1:
lock is also held for the if()

---
 drivers/tty/n_gsm.c | 13 +++++--------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
drivers/tty/n_gsm.c +5 -8
index 9aff371..697b31e 100644
@@ -2038,16 +2038,13 @@ static void gsm_cleanup_mux(struct gsm_mux *gsm)
 	gsm->dead = 1;
 
 	spin_lock(&gsm_mux_lock);
-	for (i = 0; i < MAX_MUX; i++) {
-		if (gsm_mux[i] == gsm) {
-			gsm_mux[i] = NULL;
-			break;
-		}
-	}
-	spin_unlock(&gsm_mux_lock);
 	/* open failed before registering => nothing to do */
-	if (i == MAX_MUX)
+	if (gsm_mux[gsm->num] != gsm) {
+		spin_unlock(&gsm_mux_lock);
 		return;
+	}
+	gsm_mux[gsm->num] = NULL;
+	spin_unlock(&gsm_mux_lock);
 
 	/* In theory disconnecting DLCI 0 is sufficient but for some
 	   modems this is apparently not the case. */
Signature · 1 line
1.9.1
maintainer
#1 lore raw
Quoted 6 lines · xinhui

From: Pan Xinhui <[email protected]>

There is one filed gsm->num to store mux's index of gsm_mux[]. So use gsm->num to remove itself from gsm_mux[] instead of the for-loop traverse in gsm_cleanup_mux().

Quoted 8 lines
Signed-off-by Pan Xinhui <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by Alan Cox <[email protected]>

---
change from V1:
lock is also held for the if()

---
 drivers/tty/n_gsm.c | 13 +++++--------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

Doesn't apply to my tree :(