On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 20:31:50 +0300
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 01:18:27PM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 18:38:08 +0300
> > Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > pr_debug("removing max3100 driver\n");
> > > uart_unregister_driver(&max3100_uart_driver);
> > > + uart_driver_registered = 0;
> >
> > At the beginning of the probe function, we have:
> >
> > -----------------------
> > if (!uart_driver_registered) {
> > uart_driver_registered = 1;
> > retval = uart_register_driver(&max3100_uart_driver);
> > if (retval) {
> > printk(KERN_ERR "Couldn't register max3100 uart
> > driver\n"); mutex_unlock(&max3100s_lock);
> > return retval;
> > ...
> > -----------------------
> >
> > If uart_register_driver() fails, uart_driver_registered would still be
> > true and would it prevent any other subsequent devices from being
> > properly registered? If yes, then maybe "uart_driver_registered = 1"
> > should be set only after a sucessfull call to uart_register_driver()?
>
> Looks like yet another issue here (however I haven't hit it so far).
> I guess I can combine both fixes. What do you think?
Hi Andy,
makes sense to me.
Hugo.
>
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
