From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Cox Subject: Re: Extending virtio_console to support multiple ports Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 10:08:09 +0100 Message-ID: <20090827100809.5f0aa0a7__47239.6927340471$1251397117$gmane$org@linux.intel.com> References: <1251181044-3696-1-git-send-email-amit.shah@redhat.com> <20090826112718.GA11117@amit-x200.redhat.com> <20090826154552.GA31910@amit-x200.redhat.com> <1251346023.20467.21.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1251346023.20467.21.camel@pasglop> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, miltonm@bga.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, brueckner@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Amit Shah , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org > - Then, are we certain that there's no case where the tty layer will > call us with some lock held or in an atomic context ? To be honest, > I've totally lost track of the locking rules in tty land lately so it > might well be ok, but something to verify. Some of the less well behaved line disciplines do this and always have done. Alan