From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751944Ab0BGH0w (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Feb 2010 02:26:52 -0500 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:44423 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750810Ab0BGH0u (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Feb 2010 02:26:50 -0500 Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 23:27:02 -0800 From: Greg KH To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Tetsuo Handa , taviso@google.com, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ebiederm@xmission.com, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, jdike@addtoit.com, jln@google.com, mpm@selenic.com Subject: Re: [2.6.33-rc5] tty: possible irq lock inversion dependency in tty_fasync Message-ID: <20100207072702.GA9768@suse.de> References: <201002071452.IIF73922.VtFOJOHSFFLOQM@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 10:46:01PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Sat, 6 Feb 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > Yeah. I think we need to just revert that commit. > > > > Or maybe we could just do the following, rather than revert it outright: > > just get a ref to the 'struct pid' while holding the spinlock, and then > > releasing it after doing the __f_setown() call. > > Btw, if we do this, then we should probably revert commit > b04da8bfdfbbd79544cab2fadfdc12e87eb01600 at the same time. > > Resulting patch would then look like the appended. The patch looks correct to me, thanks for fixing this. Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman Can you commit it to your tree, or do you need/want me to submit it? thanks, greg k-h