Hi, On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 2:34 AM John Ogness <john.ogness@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The only user of the start_rx() callback (qcom_geni) directly calls > its own stop_rx() callback. Since stop_rx() requires that the > port->lock is taken and interrupts are disabled, the start_rx() > callback has the same requirement. > > Fixes: cfab87c2c271 ("serial: core: Introduce callback for start_rx and do stop_rx in suspend only if this callback implementation is present.") > Signed-off-by: John Ogness <john.ogness@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c | 5 ++++- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c b/drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c > index 37ad53616372..f856c7fae2fd 100644 > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c > @@ -2430,8 +2430,11 @@ int uart_resume_port(struct uart_driver *drv, struct uart_port *uport) > if (console_suspend_enabled) > uart_change_pm(state, UART_PM_STATE_ON); > uport->ops->set_termios(uport, &termios, NULL); > - if (!console_suspend_enabled && uport->ops->start_rx) > + if (!console_suspend_enabled && uport->ops->start_rx) { > + spin_lock_irq(&uport->lock); > uport->ops->start_rx(uport); > + spin_unlock_irq(&uport->lock); > + } Seems right, but shouldn't you also fix the call to stop_rx() that the same commit cfab87c2c271 ("serial: core: Introduce callback for start_rx and do stop_rx in suspend only if this callback implementation is present.") added? That one is also missing the lock, right? -Doug