Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 11 Jan 2003 14:13:59 +0100 | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*? |
| |
On Sat, Jan 11, 2003 at 02:01:51PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > > --- linux-2.5.56-work/drivers/char/tty_io.c-o 2003-01-02 05:13:12.000000000 +0100 > > +++ linux-2.5.56-work/drivers/char/tty_io.c 2003-01-11 13:23:15.000000000 +0100 > > @@ -1329,6 +1329,8 @@ > > int major, minor; > > struct tty_driver *driver; > > > > + lock_kernel(); > > + > > Deadlock. chrdev_open() calls lock_kernel() and then the fops->open > method, which is tty_open().
No problem, lock_kernel is recursive and dropped on schedule.
It is very very hard to get a BKL deadlock.
> This one needs deeper review.
I agree, but one has to start somewhere. Please submit any fixes, perhaps we can take then close these issues for good.
Was looking at n_tty.c now, looks like it has some more race problems.
-Andi - 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/
| |