Re: [PATCH 3/3] tty_lock: Localise the lock
From: Sasha Levin <hidden>
Date: 2012-05-07 16:03:31
Also in:
lkml
Hi Alan, On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Alan Cox [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/drivers/tty/pty.c b/drivers/tty/pty.c index 5505ffc..d6fa842 100644 --- a/drivers/tty/pty.c +++ b/drivers/tty/pty.c@@ -62,9 +63,7 @@ static void pty_close(struct tty_struct *tty, struct file *filp)mutex_unlock(&devpts_mutex); } #endif - tty_unlock(); tty_vhangup(tty->link); - tty_lock(); } }
I don't believe that this change is correct. Consider the following scenario: tty_release -> tty_lock -> pty_close -> tty_vhangup -> tty_lock Which would cause a deadlock. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html