lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jan]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?
On Sat, Jan 11, 2003 at 02:01:51PM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> > --- linux-2.5.56-work/drivers/char/tty_io.c-o 2003-01-02 05:13:12.000000000 +0100
> > +++ linux-2.5.56-work/drivers/char/tty_io.c 2003-01-11 13:23:15.000000000 +0100
> > @@ -1329,6 +1329,8 @@
> > int major, minor;
> > struct tty_driver *driver;
> >
> > + lock_kernel();
> > +
>
> Deadlock. chrdev_open() calls lock_kernel() and then the fops->open
> method, which is tty_open().

No problem, lock_kernel is recursive and dropped on schedule.

It is very very hard to get a BKL deadlock.

> This one needs deeper review.

I agree, but one has to start somewhere. Please submit any fixes,
perhaps we can take then close these issues for good.

Was looking at n_tty.c now, looks like it has some more race
problems.


-Andi
-
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 13:32    [W:0.084 / U:1.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site