Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 24 Jun 2021 15:07:28 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Saubhik Mukherjee <saubhik.mukherjee@gmail.com>
Cc:     vgupta@synopsys.com, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org>,
        linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ldv-project@linuxtesting.org,
        Pavel Andrianov <andrianov@ispras.ru>
Subject: Re: [question] De-registration does not remove port
Message-ID: <YNSDkDnrI38/+VAZ@kroah.com>
References: <3e131267-e1b3-1b83-f8be-0577da479223@gmail.com>
 <YNLfcKFL1LkJgXAR@kroah.com>
 <7af6c0a5-c990-5a40-104e-13f44b1cb4c5@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <7af6c0a5-c990-5a40-104e-13f44b1cb4c5@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 06:33:01PM +0530, Saubhik Mukherjee wrote:
> On 6/23/21 12:44 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 11:42:36AM +0530, Saubhik Mukherjee wrote:
> > > In drivers/tty/serial/arc_uart.c, arc_serial_remove always returns 0,
> > > instead of calling uart_remove_one_port to remove uart port from serial
> > > core. The comment says "This will be never be called". In my understanding,
> > > a port added using uart_add_one_port should be removed during
> > > de-registration.
> > > 
> > > Is there a reason for this behavior?
> > 
> > Did you test the code to see if that function will ever be called?
> 
> I would like to reformulate the question: Suppose arc_serial_remove is never
> called. Then I would like to know how the driver de-registration is
> organized since the UART port is never removed?

I would like to reiterate my original question, have you tested this?