| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <45BA1556.8080808@microgate.com> Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 08:51:02 -0600 From: Paul Fulghum <paulkf@...rogate.com> To: Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@...lub.uwaterloo.ca> CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Strange problem with tty layer Lennart Sorensen wrote: > Well it turns out that didn't help. Neither does 2.6.18 (that one was > the easiest newer one to try). It does seem as if the error rate is > lower with 2.6.18 than with 2.6.16, so perhaps there was more than one > place that could cause losses in the tty buffering. I had only 2 > failures in 15 hours with 2.6.18, rather than a whole lot of failures > with 2.6.16. I guess I will have to try 2.6.19 or even something newer. You can eliminate the tty buffering altogether by observing what gets passed to the line discipline. I assume you are using the default line discipline N_TTY. Look at what is passed to drivers/char/n_tty.c:n_tty_receive_buf() If all the data gets that far, then there is some issue with the line discipline or something further downstream. If not, then the problem is with the tty buffering (assuming you are correct that all data gets to the tty buffering code followed by a tty_flip_buffer_push call). -- Paul Fulghum Microgate Systems, Ltd. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists