Jason Baron wrote:
patch looks good to me. Or you could even drop the tty_sem completely from
the release_dev path (patch below) since lock_kernel() is held in both
tty_open() and the release_dev paths()
The historical posts on locking in release_dev()
I looked at suggest that a move from BKL to more
fine grained synchronization (tty_sem) was a goal.
The code looks like it originally relied on the BKL.
The later addition of tty_sem was done in a way
that allowed sleeping between setting tty_closing
and TTY_CLOSING flag:
down(&tty_sem)
if (tty->count == 1)
tty_closing = 1;
up(&tty_sem)
...
down(&tty_sem) <<<< can sleep, open can increase count
tty->count--
up(&tty_sem)
...
if (tty_closing)
set_bit(TTY_CLOSING)
> (and there is no sleeping b/w setting the tty_closing
> flag and setting the TTY_CLOSING bit).
Your patch leaves the schedule() call at the bottom of
the while loop between setting tty_closing and
setting TTY_CLOSING flag.
Thanks,
Paul
--
Paul Fulghum
Microgate Systems, Ltd
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
