[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130206194514.16104.qmail@science.horizon.com>
Date: 6 Feb 2013 14:45:14 -0500
From: "George Spelvin" <linux@...izon.com>
To: linux@...izon.com, peter@...leysoftware.com
Cc: jslaby@...e.cz, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 3.8-rc regression with pps-ldisc due to 70ece7a731
> Tight coupling is what caused this to break in the first place -- I
> don't think tighter coupling is the right answer.
Agreed. But given that n_tty already knows there are wrappers, it would
have been possible to find a cleaner way to access an "aux pointer" in
the tty structure, if that's what was desired.
> You are not supposed to receive ldisc->dcd_change() calls outside
> the open()/close() pair.
Yes, I figured that out. I was wondering because I couldn't see any
way that the serial interrupt hander was blocked or masked, but
then I figured out that it's not, but instead the TTY_LDISC flag
is used.
At the time the open() method is called, the flag is cleared, which makes
tty_ldisc_ref() return NULL, which prevents calling the ldisc methods.
> In the patch series I sent, I changed the BUG_ON() to WARN_ON_ONCE().
> Please reply to that patch with the snipped kernel log output if it
> warns in your testing and we'll go from there.
I really doubt it will. The entire code change and comment was
just caution on my part.
>> (Have I mentioned how ANNOYING it is when the kernel dumps more than
>> 50 lines of crash message to the console screen and then locks
>> the keyboard so I can't scroll back?)
> netconsole on 2nd machine (see Documentation/networking/netconsole.txt)
Oh, that survives interrupt crashes? Thank you!
--
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