lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] TTY: Fix loss of echoed characters (2nd follow-on PATCH attached)
Alan Cox wrote:
> If you have the column handling isolated and locked that is a big step
> towards exterminating the BKL in the n_tty code. It also illustrates why
> locking people always say "lock data not code".

Well, it's isolated, but still locked with the BKL, which would be great
to get rid of. A few questions for you, since you've worked with this
code (and kernel locking stuff) a lot longer than I:

1) Now that column state is confined to the process_out/echo funcs in
n_tty, would using tty_write_lock() (the defined atomic write lock
mutex) be a good replacement for lock_kernel(), even though interruptible?

2) To protect echo buffer operations, I would lean toward using a
separate echo lock mutex so it does not lock against non-echo-buffer
output. Would nesting this with #1 be advisable? Should it be
interruptable?

3) tty_write() mentions refers to ldisc use of the BKL. If we change
this, are there any considerations for the tty_io or driver code?

Thanks, Joe


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-09-09 15:17    [W:0.193 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site