lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jun]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: TTY: ntty, add one more sanity check
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 07:30:31PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 06/07/2011 07:20 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 05, 2011 at 02:16:17PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> >> With the previous patch, we fixed another bug where read_buf was freed
> >> while we still was in n_tty_read. We currently check whether read_buf
> >> is NULL at the start of the function. Add one more check after we wake
> >> up from waiting for input.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
> >> Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/tty/n_tty.c | 1 +
> >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/tty/n_tty.c b/drivers/tty/n_tty.c
> >> index 95d0a9c..c62c856 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/tty/n_tty.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/tty/n_tty.c
> >> @@ -1785,6 +1785,7 @@ do_it_again:
> >> break;
> >> }
> >> timeout = schedule_timeout(timeout);
> >> + BUG_ON(!tty->read_buf);
> >> continue;
> >> }
> >> __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
> >
> > This doesn't apply anymore without some fuzz as stuff has changed in
> > this area in Linus's tree.
> >
> > Can you refresh it and resend it so that I know it's correct?
> >
> > Or, just verify that the diff below is correct, and I'll take that one.
>
> Yes, it's correct.

Thanks for confirming, now applied.

greg k-h


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-06-07 19:41    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans