[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120324232001.GK6589@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 23:20:01 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
Subject: Re: TTY: tty_port questions
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 11:48:32AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > It will be. In order to fix the tty locking mess we need to shove a lot
> > > of stuff whose lifetime is the lifetime of the physical port somewhere
> > > else - the tty_port is that structure.
> > >
> >
> > "It will be" in terms of "not now"? ;-)
>
> As in, it's the very next step on.
FWIW, uml console in default config is basically "start xterm for each VC".
What do you suggest to do on vhangup() on one of those?
--
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