linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/9] tty_port: allow a port to be opened with a tty that has no file handle

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]

Date:   Tue, 17 Jan 2017 14:57:29 +0000
From:   One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "Dr . H . Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>,
        Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@...el.com>,
        Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, NeilBrown <neil@...wn.name>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/9] tty_port: allow a port to be opened with a tty
 that has no file handle

On Mon, 16 Jan 2017 16:54:29 -0600
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> wrote:

> From: Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> Let us create tty objects entirely in kernel space. Untested proposal to
> show why all the ideas around rewriting half the uart stack are not needed.
> 
> With this a kernel created non file backed tty object could be used to handle
> data, and set terminal modes. Not all ldiscs can cope with this as N_TTY in
> particular has to work back to the fs/tty layer.
> 
> The tty_port code is however otherwise clean of file handles as far as I can
> tell as is the low level tty port write path used by the ldisc, the
> configuration low level interfaces and most of the ldiscs.
> 
> Currently you don't have any exposure to see tty hangups because those are
> built around the file layer. However a) it's a fixed port so you probably
> don't care about that b) if you do we can add a callback and c) you almost
> certainly don't want the userspace tear down/rebuild behaviour anyway.
> 
> This should however be sufficient if we wanted for example to enumerate all
> the bluetooth bound fixed ports via ACPI and make them directly available.
> It doesn't deal with the case of a user opening a port that's also kernel
> opened and that would need some locking out (so it returned EBUSY if bound
> to a kernel device of some kind). That needs resolving along with how you
> "up" or "down" your new bluetooth device, or enumerate it while providing
> the existing tty API to avoid regressions (and to debug).
> 
> Alan
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> Reviewed-By: Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>
> ---
> Alan, Need your SoB here.

Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>

Alan