From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman Subject: Re: [PATCH] n_tty: Protect minimum_to_wake reset for concurrent readers Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 08:36:02 -0800 Message-ID: <20131125163602.GA19071@kroah.com> References: <1383850917-24416-1-git-send-email-peter@hurleysoftware.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:46691 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756687Ab3KYQgE (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Nov 2013 11:36:04 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1383850917-24416-1-git-send-email-peter@hurleysoftware.com> Sender: linux-serial-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org To: Peter Hurley Cc: Jiri Slaby , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 02:01:57PM -0500, Peter Hurley wrote: > With multiple, concurrent readers (each waiting to acquire the > atomic_read_lock mutex), a departing reader may mistakenly reset > minimum_to_wake after a new reader has already set a new value. > > Protect the minimum_to_wake reset with the atomic_read_lock critical > section. > > Signed-off-by: Peter Hurley > --- > drivers/tty/n_tty.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) This patch doesn't apply to Linus's tree anymore (and hence, mine.) Is it needed for 3.13-final? Or just 3.14-rc1? Either way, can you refresh it and resend? thanks, greg k-h