Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Sergey Organov wrote:
>
>> Hi Stefan,
>>
>> Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > Hi Sergey,
>> >
>> > Am 21.01.23 um 16:36 schrieb Sergey Organov:
>> >> Do not call uart_handle_sysrq_char() if we got any receive error
>> >> along with the character, as we don't want random junk to be
>> >> considered a sysrq.
>> >> Signed-off-by: Sergey Organov <sorganov@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >
>> > this looks like a bugfix to me. Since the relevant code is pretty old,
>> > i'm not sure about the fixes tag here:
>> >
>> > Fixes: 279a9acc9b72 ("2.6.11 import") ?
>>
>> Dunno. I've checked a few drivers, and it seems that they don't care
>> either, e.g., look at atmel_serial.c, or mpc52xx_uart.c.
>>
>> Either it doesn't matter, or a few drivers need similar fix? What's
>> going on here, I wonder?
>
> Usually when one finds a bug from one of the drivers, the other drivers
> indeed turn out to have the same/similar bug(s). It's not something
> uncommon.
Yep, it looks like deriving from the same template, with the same issue.
>
> So just fix them all, it's very much appreciated. :-) I understand it
> might not be possible to test all such fixes on those other HWs but
> usually such bugs are simple enough to fix that it isn't be a big problem.
I'm not even sure this is really a bug, as nobody seems to confirm it
with authority yet.
Thanks,
-- Sergey Organov
