public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: gregkh@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Char: TTY, restore tty_ldisc_wait_idle
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 23:05:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CC0AB32.1080609@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinZNekvQHn4FYm-aJqGziV_zeUkdwtWWDb09ofm@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/21/2010 04:17 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 6:58 AM, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz> wrote:
>> It was removed in 65b770468e98 (tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into
>> a proper refcount), but we need to wait for last user to quit the
>> ldisc before we close it in tty_set_ldisc.
>>
>> Otherwise weird things start to happen. There might be processes
>> waiting in tty_read->n_tty_read on tty->read_wait for input to appear
>> and at that moment, a change of ldisc is fatal. n_tty_close is called,
>> it frees read_buf and the waiting process is still in the middle of
>> reading and goes nuts after it is woken.
> 
> Hmm. Looks reasonable. And the waiting is outside the lock, so there
> aren't any of the problem cases that caused the original changes. And
> we don't need the lock, because the TTY_LDISC_CHANGING bit will
> protect against anything new coming in, so we don't have races with
> the count going up afterwards.
> 
> And you're right about the lockless approach being reasonable inside
> the testing code too - it's atomic as you say, and we don't touch/care
> about anything else.
> 
> So I don't have any objections, apart from thinking that the ldisc
> code is apparently still too fragile if this is needed.  But the ldisc
> change is so special that I don't think this is a unreasonable hack.
> Even if it _is_ a bit of a hack still.

Actually the fail path handling should be more than in the patch.
Otherwise I get warnings here and there (TTY_LDISC is not set in
tty_open). Something like the diff below.

> So feel free to add an acked-by: from me. Whoever saw the problem
> should probably test the patch first, though.

Ok, thanks for the review, I fwded to people who hit the bug.





---
@@ -654,14 +659,16 @@ int tty_set_ldisc(struct tty_struct *tty, int ldisc)
 	flush_scheduled_work();

 	retval = tty_ldisc_wait_idle(tty);
+
+	tty_lock();
+	mutex_lock(&tty->ldisc_mutex);
+
+	/* handle wait idle failure locked */
 	if (retval) {
-		clear_bit(TTY_LDISC_CHANGING, &tty->flags);
 		tty_ldisc_put(new_ldisc);
-		return retval;
+		goto enable;
 	}

-	tty_lock();
-	mutex_lock(&tty->ldisc_mutex);
 	if (test_bit(TTY_HUPPED, &tty->flags)) {
 		/* We were raced by the hangup method. It will have stomped
 		   the ldisc data and closed the ldisc down */
@@ -695,6 +702,7 @@ int tty_set_ldisc(struct tty_struct *tty, int ldisc)

 	tty_ldisc_put(o_ldisc);

+enable:
 	/*
 	 *	Allow ldisc referencing to occur again
 	 */


thanks,
-- 
js

      reply	other threads:[~2010-10-21 21:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-10-21 13:58 [PATCH 1/1] Char: TTY, restore tty_ldisc_wait_idle Jiri Slaby
2010-10-21 14:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-10-21 21:05   ` Jiri Slaby [this message]

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=4CC0AB32.1080609@gmail.com \
    --to=jirislaby@gmail.com \
    --cc=alan@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=gregkh@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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