[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47D869D1.4040107@microgate.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:40:01 -0600
From: Paul Fulghum <paulkf@...rogate.com>
To: rupesh.sugathan@...il.com
CC: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: + n_tty-loss-of-sync-following-a-buffer-overflow.patch added
to -mm tree
Rupesh Sugathan wrote:
> I have another suggestion to this subject. When the buffer oveflows in
> icaonon mode, it would be *best* if the application either gets a
> complete line or does not get it at all. On a buffer overflow, it would
> be good that the n_tty discard the whole line data in the buffer (part
> of which has overflown) and make more room in the buffer.
>
> Does it make sense to any of you?
I don't know if there is a standard behavior under
these conditions so it is hard to argue it should
be handled a particular way other than leaving the
device in a consistent and recoverable state.
I doubt there would be support for making such changes.
Making that decision in the kernel and
having an application depend on that non-portable
behavior does not make sense.
Given that a n_tty receive overflow is not possible in
the current kernel (though data can still be lost elsewhere),
I doubt even my patch merits inclusion.
--
Paul
--
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