linux-kernel - Re: tty breakage in X (Was: tty vs workqueue oddities)

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20110608100453.6e5cc29d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date:	Wed, 8 Jun 2011 10:04:53 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Guillaume Chazarain <guichaz@...il.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	gregkh@...e.de,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: tty breakage in X (Was: tty vs workqueue oddities)

> I'd love to get rid of receive_room entirely - and just letting the
> tty line discipline handler say how much it actually received. in
> other words, having receive_buf() just tell us how much it used, and
> not looking at receive_room in the caller is absolutely the right
> thing.

Shouldn't be too hard - the only use of receive_room beyond setting it to
'fire at will' is n_tty.
--
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/