On Thu, 31 May 2007 15:42:26 +0200
Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]> wrote:
> drivers/char/tty_io.c: Use spinlock instead of a (binary) semaphore
>
hm.
>
> --
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/tty_io.c b/drivers/char/tty_io.c
> index 7a32df5..ff27587 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/tty_io.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/tty_io.c
We end up with this:
/* find a device that is not in use. */
if (!idr_pre_get(&allocated_ptys, GFP_KERNEL))
return -ENOMEM;
spin_lock(&allocated_ptys_lock);
idr_ret = idr_get_new(&allocated_ptys, NULL, &index);
if (idr_ret < 0) {
spin_unlock(&allocated_ptys_lock);
if (idr_ret == -EAGAIN)
return -ENOMEM;
return -EIO;
}
if (index >= pty_limit) {
idr_remove(&allocated_ptys, index);
spin_unlock(&allocated_ptys_lock);
return -EIO;
}
spin_unlock(&allocated_ptys_lock);
this leaves a small window in which another thread can come in and steal
away the idr tree's reserves, causing the idr_get_new() to fail. It's
highly improbable, but it's real.
Hence I think a straight semaphore->mutex conversion would be better.
The IDR API absolutely blows chunks: it should require caller-provided
locking, like radix-tree. But then it'd need gunk like radix_tree_preload
to be reliable. Fact is, storage librares which need to allocate memory at
insert-time are always going to be problematic in-kernel.
-
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]
