[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090829011517.GG8036@shareable.org>
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 02:15:17 +0100
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, miltonm@....com,
qemu-devel@...gnu.org, borntraeger@...ibm.com,
brueckner@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Amit Shah <amit.shah@...hat.com>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Extending virtio_console to support multiple ports
Alan Cox wrote:
> > - 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.
I had a backtrace in my kernel log recently which looked like that,
while doing PPP over Bluetooth RFCOMM. Resulted in AppArmor
complaining that it's hook was being called in irq context.
-- Jamie
--
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