From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davem@redhat.com,
sds@tycho.nsa.gov, jack@suse.cz, dwmw2@infradead.org,
jdike@karaya.com, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com
Subject: Re: How to lock current->signal->tty
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 09:41:27 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060808164127.GA11392@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1155051876.5729.93.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 04:44:36PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> Ar Maw, 2006-08-08 am 08:10 -0700, ysgrifennodd Arjan van de Ven:
> > > Unfortunately:
> > > Dquot passes the tty to tty_write_message without locking
> > > arch/ia64/kernel/unanligned seems to write to it without locking
> >
> > these two have absolutely no business at all using anything tty.... they should
> > just use printk with KERN_EMERG or whatever
>
> Dquot does - it writes to the controlling tty of the process exceeding
> quota . That is standard Unix behaviour
IA-64 is also trying to be helpful by putting the message where
the user may actually see it (following the dquot precedent). But
the whole subject of whether we should print any messages for
unaligned accesses at all is rather controversial. So its a 50-50
shot whether I'll fix it by adding the mutex_lock/mutex_unlock
around the use of current->signal->tty, or just rip this out and
just leave the printk().
-Tony
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-08-08 16:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-08-08 15:17 How to lock current->signal->tty Alan Cox
2006-08-08 15:10 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-08-08 15:44 ` Alan Cox
2006-08-08 16:41 ` Luck, Tony [this message]
2006-08-08 17:50 ` Alan Cox
2006-08-09 8:09 ` Jes Sorensen
2006-08-09 10:44 ` Alan Cox
2006-08-09 11:26 ` Jes Sorensen
2006-08-09 16:24 ` Luck, Tony
2006-08-09 18:10 ` Jes Sorensen
2006-08-08 22:06 ` Jan Kara
2006-08-08 17:11 ` Stephen Smalley
2006-08-08 17:43 ` Alan Cox
2006-08-08 17:44 ` Stephen Smalley
2006-08-08 18:10 ` Alan Cox
2006-08-08 20:02 ` Stephen Smalley
2006-08-13 21:34 ` Jan Kara
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-08-09 4:01 Albert Cahalan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060808164127.GA11392@intel.com \
--to=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jdike@karaya.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox