From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Paul Fulghum <paulkf@microgate.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] n_hdlc fix read and write locking
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 22:31:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201010252231.06794.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1288030959.19909.28.camel@x2.microgate.com>
On Monday 25 October 2010 20:22:39 Paul Fulghum wrote:
> Fix locking in read and write code of n_hdlc line discipline.
>
> 2.6.36 replaced lock_kernel() with tty_lock().
> The tty mutex is not dropped automatically when the thread
> sleeps like the BKL. This results in a blocked read or write holding
> the tty mutex and stalling operations by other devices that use
> the tty mutex.
>
> A review of n_hdlc read and write code shows:
> 1. neither BKL or tty mutex are required for correct operation
> 2. read can block while read data is available if data is posted
> between availability check and call to interruptible_sleep_on()
> 3. write does not set process state to TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE
> on each pass through the processing loop which can cause
> unneeded scheduling of the thread
Right. I must have missed this when I was not checking for
interruptible_sleep_on(). I did systematically check for
this problem with the wait_event family as well as
work_queues, mutexes, semaphores and hand-written schedule
loops, but for some reason I did not check for sleep_on :(
I've double-checked it now, and it seems that all other
instances of sleep_on are waiting for close_wait in
block_til_ready or open functions, and I remember that
I did check those and convinced myself that they are fine.
> Write corrected to set process state to
> TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE on each pass through processing loop.
Would it be possible to express the same using
wait_event_interruptible()?
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-25 20:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-25 18:22 [PATCH] n_hdlc fix read and write locking Paul Fulghum
2010-10-25 20:05 ` Andrew Morton
2010-10-25 20:29 ` Paul Fulghum
2010-10-25 21:19 ` Paul Fulghum
2010-10-25 20:31 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2010-10-25 23:18 ` Paul Fulghum
2010-10-26 10:40 ` Arnd Bergmann
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=201010252231.06794.arnd@arndb.de \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulkf@microgate.com \
/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