[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <486A3B4A.2090005@skyrush.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 08:12:26 -0600
From: Joe Peterson <joe@...rush.com>
To: Elias Oltmanns <eo@...ensachen.de>
CC: Török Edwin <edwintorok@...il.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Ctrl+C doesn't interrupt process waiting for I/O
Elias Oltmanns wrote:
> The following patch to 2.6.26-rc8 fixes the issue for me. Perhaps we
> really want to do something else, but since I'm not all that familiar
> with the standard behaviour on other Unices and since the comment
> describing the changed order of function calls in the original commit
> didn't give the reason for that change, I leave that to more
> knowledgeable people.
>
> drivers/char/n_tty.c | 13 +------------
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/n_tty.c b/drivers/char/n_tty.c
> index 8096389..74018ef 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/n_tty.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/n_tty.c
> @@ -759,20 +759,9 @@ static inline void n_tty_receive_char(struct tty_struct *tty, unsigned char c)
> signal = SIGTSTP;
> if (c == SUSP_CHAR(tty)) {
> send_signal:
> - /*
> - * Echo character, and then send the signal.
> - * Note that we do not use isig() here because we want
> - * the order to be:
> - * 1) flush, 2) echo, 3) signal
> - */
> - if (!L_NOFLSH(tty)) {
> - n_tty_flush_buffer(tty);
> - tty_driver_flush_buffer(tty);
> - }
> if (L_ECHO(tty))
> echo_char(c, tty);
> - if (tty->pgrp)
> - kill_pgrp(tty->pgrp, signal, 1);
> + isig(signal, tty, 0);
> return;
> }
> }
I noticed the original post in this thread mentioned that the problem
has been seen since 2.6.21 or 2.6.23:
> I use 2.6.25-2 and 2.6.26-rc8 now; I don't recall seeing this
> behaviour with old kernels (IIRC I see this since 2.6.21 or 2.6.23).
>
> Is this intended behaviour, or should I report a bug?
The echo patch that is altered in the patch above only appeared recently
(in 2.6.25). Is there a way for you try try the test case on a
pre-2.6.25 kernel and see if the issue exists there? If so, it is
strange that the above fixes it.
-Joe
--
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