[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090827100809.5f0aa0a7@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 10:08:09 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc: Amit Shah <amit.shah@...hat.com>, qemu-devel@...gnu.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
borntraeger@...ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
miltonm@....com, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
brueckner@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: Extending virtio_console to support multiple ports
> - Then, are we certain that there's no case where the tty layer will
> call us with some lock held or in an atomic context ? To be honest,
> I've totally lost track of the locking rules in tty land lately so it
> might well be ok, but something to verify.
Some of the less well behaved line disciplines do this and always have
done.
Alan
--
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