linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] vt: push down the tty lock so we can see what is left to tackle

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

Message-Id: <201203012151.20940.arnd@arndb.de>
Date:	Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:51:20 +0000
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] vt: push down the tty lock so we can see what is left to tackle

On Thursday 01 March 2012, Alan Cox wrote:
> @@ -1407,6 +1425,7 @@ int vt_move_to_console(unsigned int vt, int alloc)
>                 return -EIO;
>         }
>         console_unlock();
> +       /* Review: I don't see why we need tty_lock here FIXME */
>         tty_lock();
>         if (vt_waitactive(vt + 1)) {
>                 pr_debug("Suspend: Can't switch VCs.");

I'm pretty sure I only added this in be1bc288 "tty: introduce
wait_event_interruptible_tty" so I could release the mutex again in
vt_event_wait.

All other callers of that function hold it, so it needs to be released
in vt_event_wait and that can only be done if it's known to be held first.

	Arnd
--
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/