From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: [PATCH v2 0/4] TTY: port hangup and close fixes]
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 17:32:04 -0500
Message-ID: <1362522724.18799.149.camel@thor.lan>
References: <1362085054.3337.20.camel@thor.lan> <51361724.4050107@suse.cz>
	  <1362503170.18799.33.camel@thor.lan> <51366A29.2060808@suse.cz>
	 <1362520976.18799.134.camel@thor.lan> <51366D3E.2050903@suse.cz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-serial-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mailout01.c08.mtsvc.net ([205.186.168.189]:54405 "EHLO
	mailout01.c08.mtsvc.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1755368Ab3CEWcT (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-serial@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 5 Mar 2013 17:32:19 -0500
In-Reply-To: <51366D3E.2050903@suse.cz>
Sender: linux-serial-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org
To: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Cc: jhovold@gmail.com, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>, USB list <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 23:10 +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 03/05/2013 11:02 PM, Peter Hurley wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 22:56 +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> >> On 03/05/2013 06:06 PM, Peter Hurley wrote:
> >>>>> @@ -225,15 +232,13 @@ void tty_port_hangup(struct tty_port *port)
> >>>>         spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags);
> >>>>         port->count = 0;
> >>>>         port->flags &= ~ASYNC_NORMAL_ACTIVE;
> >>>> -       if (port->tty) {
> >>>> +       if (port->tty)
> >>>>                 set_bit(TTY_IO_ERROR, &port->tty->flags);
> >>>> -               tty_kref_put(port->tty);
> >>>> -       }
> >>>> -       port->tty = NULL;
> >>>>         spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags);
> >>>>> +       tty_port_shutdown(port, port->tty);
> >>>>
> >>>> What prevents port->tty to be NULL here already?
> >>>
> >>> Nothing. That's why it's tested in tty_port_shutdown() above.
> >>
> >> I know :).
> > 
> > Sorry :)
> > 
> >> But the question is rather don't we want to pass the real
> >> refcounted port->tty (take a snapshot inside the lock) instead?
> > 
> > I think that's why he moved the kref release to after the shutdown (via
> > tty_port_set_tty()) -- but I'm tired and maybe I'm missing something
> > here?
> 
> port->tty can be changed right after the unlock.

Right. My bad. Thanks for catching this.

>  So I'm thinking about
> something like this:
> 
> if (port->tty)
>    set_bit(TTY_IO_ERROR, &port->tty->flags);
> tty = port->tty; <=== take a snapshot
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags);
> tty_port_shutdown(port, tty); <=== use the snapshot
> set_tty_port(port, NULL); <=== put kref on that tty

Yeah, that's better.

Regards,
Peter Hurley