From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jamie Lokier Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Extending virtio_console to support multiple ports Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 02:15:17 +0100 Message-ID: <20090829011517.GG8036@shareable.org> References: <1251181044-3696-1-git-send-email-amit.shah@redhat.com> <20090826112718.GA11117@amit-x200.redhat.com> <20090826154552.GA31910@amit-x200.redhat.com> <1251346023.20467.21.camel@pasglop> <20090827100809.5f0aa0a7@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, miltonm@bga.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, brueckner@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Amit Shah , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Alan Cox Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090827100809.5f0aa0a7@linux.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Alan Cox wrote: > > - Then, are we certain that there's no case where the tty layer will > > call us with some lock held or in an atomic context ? To be honest, > > I've totally lost track of the locking rules in tty land lately so it > > might well be ok, but something to verify. > > Some of the less well behaved line disciplines do this and always have > done. I had a backtrace in my kernel log recently which looked like that, while doing PPP over Bluetooth RFCOMM. Resulted in AppArmor complaining that it's hook was being called in irq context. -- Jamie