![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2004 at 01:45:25AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > +remove-down_tty_sem.patch > > +tty-locking-again.patch > > > > Really, really fix the tty open/close race. > > Erm, note that tty drivers are supposed to handle the open/close stuff > themselves, They cannot. This bug relates to racy handling of tty->count at the tty_io.c level. If the driver's ->close sleeps and drops the BKL. > and it is completely valid for ->close to be called while > another thread is in ->open. In fact, it's desirable since ->open may > be waiting for the DCD line from a modem to activate, while there may > be a simultaneous O_NONBLOCK open/ioctl/close from stty. ->open is not called under tty_sem. With this change, ->close is called under tty_sem. Are ->close implementations likely to block on hardware events? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:02 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||