From: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@gmail.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
Subject: Re: v2.6.31-rc6: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000008
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:48:49 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090825024849.GA2156@darkstar> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.01.0908241655370.3824@localhost.localdomain>
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 05:09:08PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > But I wanted to let people know that the patch is clearly not the "last
> > word" on this. It's a useful thing to try, but we need something better.
>
> This may be better (this is a replacement for the previous patch).
>
> Instead of using 'cancel_delayed_work_sync()', it makes tty_ldisc_hangup()
> do a 'flush_scheduled_work()' afterwards, like the other callers already
> do.
>
> And like 'tty_ldisc_release()' already does, it does this all before even
> getting the ldisc_mutex, avoiding the deadlock.
>
> I'm not 100% happy with this patch either, but my remaining unhappiness is
> more with the tty locking in general that causes this all. I suspect this
> patch in itself is not any worse than the other hacks we have.
>
> Oh, and in case you didn't guess - this is _STILL_ totally untested. It
> compiles for me, but that's all I'm going to guarantee. I'm just looking
> at the code (and getting pretty fed up with it ;)
>
> And as already mentioned: I doubt the deadlock on tty->ldisc_mutex is
> anything that would be hit in practice. And even if it can be triggered,
> the previous patch I sent out is still interesting in a "does it make the
> problem go away" sense. Because if it doesn't (with or without a new
> deadlock), then I'm looking at all the wrong places.
Tested for half an hour, seems it fixed the problem.
>
> Linus
>
> ---
> drivers/char/tty_ldisc.c | 10 +++++++---
> 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/tty_ldisc.c b/drivers/char/tty_ldisc.c
> index 1733d34..f893d18 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/tty_ldisc.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/tty_ldisc.c
> @@ -508,8 +508,9 @@ static void tty_ldisc_restore(struct tty_struct *tty, struct tty_ldisc *old)
> * be obtained while the delayed work queue halt ensures that no more
> * data is fed to the ldisc.
> *
> - * In order to wait for any existing references to complete see
> - * tty_ldisc_wait_idle.
> + * You need to do a 'flush_scheduled_work()' (outside the ldisc_mutex
> + * in order to make sure any currently executing ldisc work is also
> + * flushed.
> */
>
> static int tty_ldisc_halt(struct tty_struct *tty)
> @@ -753,11 +754,14 @@ void tty_ldisc_hangup(struct tty_struct *tty)
> * N_TTY.
> */
> if (tty->driver->flags & TTY_DRIVER_RESET_TERMIOS) {
> + /* Make sure the old ldisc is quiescent */
> + tty_ldisc_halt(tty);
> + flush_scheduled_work();
> +
> /* Avoid racing set_ldisc or tty_ldisc_release */
> mutex_lock(&tty->ldisc_mutex);
> if (tty->ldisc) { /* Not yet closed */
> /* Switch back to N_TTY */
> - tty_ldisc_halt(tty);
> tty_ldisc_reinit(tty);
> /* At this point we have a closed ldisc and we want to
> reopen it. We could defer this to the next open but
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-25 2:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-20 5:46 v2.6.31-rc6: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000008 Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-20 6:07 ` Eric W. Biederman
[not found] ` <7b6bb4a50908200010h1c60d007p4fa017fd97c87c19@mail.gmail.com>
2009-08-20 7:33 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-20 9:23 ` Xiaotian Feng
2009-08-21 2:09 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-08-21 18:23 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-20 7:54 ` Dave Young
2009-08-20 8:00 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-20 8:19 ` Dave Young
2009-08-24 22:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-24 23:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-25 0:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-25 1:41 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-25 2:48 ` Dave Young [this message]
2009-08-25 3:08 ` Xiaotian Feng
2009-08-25 6:16 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-08-25 3:39 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-08-25 4:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-25 4:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-25 15:05 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-08-25 14:24 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-08-27 9:15 ` Zhang, Yanmin
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=20090825024849.GA2156@darkstar \
--to=hidave.darkstar@gmail.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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