2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-11-30 13:18:29 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into a proper refcount
By using the user count for the actual lifetime rules, we can get rid of
the silly "wait_for_idle" logic, because any busy ldisc will
automatically stay around until the last user releases it. This avoids
a host of odd issues, and simplifies the code.
So now, when the last ldisc reference is dropped, we just release the
ldisc operations struct reference, and free the ldisc.
It looks obvious enough, and it does work for me, but the counting
_could_ be off. It probably isn't (bad counting in the new version would
generally imply that the old code did something really bad, like free an
ldisc with a non-zero count), but it does need some testing, and
preferably somebody looking at it.
With this change, both 'tty_ldisc_put()' and 'tty_ldisc_deref()' are
just aliases for the new ref-counting 'put_ldisc()'. Both of them
decrement the ldisc user count and free it if it goes down to zero.
They're identical functions, in other words.
But the reason they still exist as sepate functions is that one of them
was exported (tty_ldisc_deref) and had a stupid name (so I don't want to
use it as the main name), and the other one was used in multiple places
(and I didn't want to make the patch larger just to rename the users).
In addition to the refcounting, I did do some minimal cleanup. For
example, now "tty_ldisc_try()" actually returns the ldisc it got under
the lock, rather than returning true/false and then the caller would
look up the ldisc again (now without the protection of the lock).
That said, there's tons of dubious use of 'tty->ldisc' without obviously
proper locking or refcounting left. I expressly did _not_ want to try to
fix it all, keeping the patch minimal. There may or may not be bugs in
that kind of code, but they wouldn't be _new_ bugs.
That said, even if the bugs aren't new, the timing and lifetime will
change. For example, some silly code may depend on the 'tty->ldisc'
pointer not changing because they hold a refcount on the 'ldisc'. And
that's no longer true - if you hold a ref on the ldisc, the 'ldisc'
itself is safe, but tty->ldisc may change.
So the proper locking (remains) to hold tty->ldisc_mutex if you expect
tty->ldisc to be stable. That's not really a _new_ rule, but it's an
example of something that the old code might have unintentionally
depended on and hidden bugs.
Whatever. The patch _looks_ sensible to me. The only users of
ldisc->users are:
- get_ldisc() - atomically increment the count
- put_ldisc() - atomically decrements the count and releases if zero
- tty_ldisc_try_get() - creates the ldisc, and sets the count to 1.
The ldisc should then either be released, or be attached to a tty.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@mail.by>
Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2009-08-03 11:11:19 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-08-03 14:54:56 -07:00
|
|
|
|
tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into a proper refcount
By using the user count for the actual lifetime rules, we can get rid of
the silly "wait_for_idle" logic, because any busy ldisc will
automatically stay around until the last user releases it. This avoids
a host of odd issues, and simplifies the code.
So now, when the last ldisc reference is dropped, we just release the
ldisc operations struct reference, and free the ldisc.
It looks obvious enough, and it does work for me, but the counting
_could_ be off. It probably isn't (bad counting in the new version would
generally imply that the old code did something really bad, like free an
ldisc with a non-zero count), but it does need some testing, and
preferably somebody looking at it.
With this change, both 'tty_ldisc_put()' and 'tty_ldisc_deref()' are
just aliases for the new ref-counting 'put_ldisc()'. Both of them
decrement the ldisc user count and free it if it goes down to zero.
They're identical functions, in other words.
But the reason they still exist as sepate functions is that one of them
was exported (tty_ldisc_deref) and had a stupid name (so I don't want to
use it as the main name), and the other one was used in multiple places
(and I didn't want to make the patch larger just to rename the users).
In addition to the refcounting, I did do some minimal cleanup. For
example, now "tty_ldisc_try()" actually returns the ldisc it got under
the lock, rather than returning true/false and then the caller would
look up the ldisc again (now without the protection of the lock).
That said, there's tons of dubious use of 'tty->ldisc' without obviously
proper locking or refcounting left. I expressly did _not_ want to try to
fix it all, keeping the patch minimal. There may or may not be bugs in
that kind of code, but they wouldn't be _new_ bugs.
That said, even if the bugs aren't new, the timing and lifetime will
change. For example, some silly code may depend on the 'tty->ldisc'
pointer not changing because they hold a refcount on the 'ldisc'. And
that's no longer true - if you hold a ref on the ldisc, the 'ldisc'
itself is safe, but tty->ldisc may change.
So the proper locking (remains) to hold tty->ldisc_mutex if you expect
tty->ldisc to be stable. That's not really a _new_ rule, but it's an
example of something that the old code might have unintentionally
depended on and hidden bugs.
Whatever. The patch _looks_ sensible to me. The only users of
ldisc->users are:
- get_ldisc() - atomically increment the count
- put_ldisc() - atomically decrements the count and releases if zero
- tty_ldisc_try_get() - creates the ldisc, and sets the count to 1.
The ldisc should then either be released, or be attached to a tty.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@mail.by>
Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2009-08-03 11:11:19 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2009-08-03 14:54:56 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into a proper refcount
By using the user count for the actual lifetime rules, we can get rid of
the silly "wait_for_idle" logic, because any busy ldisc will
automatically stay around until the last user releases it. This avoids
a host of odd issues, and simplifies the code.
So now, when the last ldisc reference is dropped, we just release the
ldisc operations struct reference, and free the ldisc.
It looks obvious enough, and it does work for me, but the counting
_could_ be off. It probably isn't (bad counting in the new version would
generally imply that the old code did something really bad, like free an
ldisc with a non-zero count), but it does need some testing, and
preferably somebody looking at it.
With this change, both 'tty_ldisc_put()' and 'tty_ldisc_deref()' are
just aliases for the new ref-counting 'put_ldisc()'. Both of them
decrement the ldisc user count and free it if it goes down to zero.
They're identical functions, in other words.
But the reason they still exist as sepate functions is that one of them
was exported (tty_ldisc_deref) and had a stupid name (so I don't want to
use it as the main name), and the other one was used in multiple places
(and I didn't want to make the patch larger just to rename the users).
In addition to the refcounting, I did do some minimal cleanup. For
example, now "tty_ldisc_try()" actually returns the ldisc it got under
the lock, rather than returning true/false and then the caller would
look up the ldisc again (now without the protection of the lock).
That said, there's tons of dubious use of 'tty->ldisc' without obviously
proper locking or refcounting left. I expressly did _not_ want to try to
fix it all, keeping the patch minimal. There may or may not be bugs in
that kind of code, but they wouldn't be _new_ bugs.
That said, even if the bugs aren't new, the timing and lifetime will
change. For example, some silly code may depend on the 'tty->ldisc'
pointer not changing because they hold a refcount on the 'ldisc'. And
that's no longer true - if you hold a ref on the ldisc, the 'ldisc'
itself is safe, but tty->ldisc may change.
So the proper locking (remains) to hold tty->ldisc_mutex if you expect
tty->ldisc to be stable. That's not really a _new_ rule, but it's an
example of something that the old code might have unintentionally
depended on and hidden bugs.
Whatever. The patch _looks_ sensible to me. The only users of
ldisc->users are:
- get_ldisc() - atomically increment the count
- put_ldisc() - atomically decrements the count and releases if zero
- tty_ldisc_try_get() - creates the ldisc, and sets the count to 1.
The ldisc should then either be released, or be attached to a tty.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@mail.by>
Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2009-08-03 11:11:19 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-08-03 14:54:56 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into a proper refcount
By using the user count for the actual lifetime rules, we can get rid of
the silly "wait_for_idle" logic, because any busy ldisc will
automatically stay around until the last user releases it. This avoids
a host of odd issues, and simplifies the code.
So now, when the last ldisc reference is dropped, we just release the
ldisc operations struct reference, and free the ldisc.
It looks obvious enough, and it does work for me, but the counting
_could_ be off. It probably isn't (bad counting in the new version would
generally imply that the old code did something really bad, like free an
ldisc with a non-zero count), but it does need some testing, and
preferably somebody looking at it.
With this change, both 'tty_ldisc_put()' and 'tty_ldisc_deref()' are
just aliases for the new ref-counting 'put_ldisc()'. Both of them
decrement the ldisc user count and free it if it goes down to zero.
They're identical functions, in other words.
But the reason they still exist as sepate functions is that one of them
was exported (tty_ldisc_deref) and had a stupid name (so I don't want to
use it as the main name), and the other one was used in multiple places
(and I didn't want to make the patch larger just to rename the users).
In addition to the refcounting, I did do some minimal cleanup. For
example, now "tty_ldisc_try()" actually returns the ldisc it got under
the lock, rather than returning true/false and then the caller would
look up the ldisc again (now without the protection of the lock).
That said, there's tons of dubious use of 'tty->ldisc' without obviously
proper locking or refcounting left. I expressly did _not_ want to try to
fix it all, keeping the patch minimal. There may or may not be bugs in
that kind of code, but they wouldn't be _new_ bugs.
That said, even if the bugs aren't new, the timing and lifetime will
change. For example, some silly code may depend on the 'tty->ldisc'
pointer not changing because they hold a refcount on the 'ldisc'. And
that's no longer true - if you hold a ref on the ldisc, the 'ldisc'
itself is safe, but tty->ldisc may change.
So the proper locking (remains) to hold tty->ldisc_mutex if you expect
tty->ldisc to be stable. That's not really a _new_ rule, but it's an
example of something that the old code might have unintentionally
depended on and hidden bugs.
Whatever. The patch _looks_ sensible to me. The only users of
ldisc->users are:
- get_ldisc() - atomically increment the count
- put_ldisc() - atomically decrements the count and releases if zero
- tty_ldisc_try_get() - creates the ldisc, and sets the count to 1.
The ldisc should then either be released, or be attached to a tty.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@mail.by>
Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2009-08-03 11:11:19 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2009-08-03 14:54:56 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into a proper refcount
By using the user count for the actual lifetime rules, we can get rid of
the silly "wait_for_idle" logic, because any busy ldisc will
automatically stay around until the last user releases it. This avoids
a host of odd issues, and simplifies the code.
So now, when the last ldisc reference is dropped, we just release the
ldisc operations struct reference, and free the ldisc.
It looks obvious enough, and it does work for me, but the counting
_could_ be off. It probably isn't (bad counting in the new version would
generally imply that the old code did something really bad, like free an
ldisc with a non-zero count), but it does need some testing, and
preferably somebody looking at it.
With this change, both 'tty_ldisc_put()' and 'tty_ldisc_deref()' are
just aliases for the new ref-counting 'put_ldisc()'. Both of them
decrement the ldisc user count and free it if it goes down to zero.
They're identical functions, in other words.
But the reason they still exist as sepate functions is that one of them
was exported (tty_ldisc_deref) and had a stupid name (so I don't want to
use it as the main name), and the other one was used in multiple places
(and I didn't want to make the patch larger just to rename the users).
In addition to the refcounting, I did do some minimal cleanup. For
example, now "tty_ldisc_try()" actually returns the ldisc it got under
the lock, rather than returning true/false and then the caller would
look up the ldisc again (now without the protection of the lock).
That said, there's tons of dubious use of 'tty->ldisc' without obviously
proper locking or refcounting left. I expressly did _not_ want to try to
fix it all, keeping the patch minimal. There may or may not be bugs in
that kind of code, but they wouldn't be _new_ bugs.
That said, even if the bugs aren't new, the timing and lifetime will
change. For example, some silly code may depend on the 'tty->ldisc'
pointer not changing because they hold a refcount on the 'ldisc'. And
that's no longer true - if you hold a ref on the ldisc, the 'ldisc'
itself is safe, but tty->ldisc may change.
So the proper locking (remains) to hold tty->ldisc_mutex if you expect
tty->ldisc to be stable. That's not really a _new_ rule, but it's an
example of something that the old code might have unintentionally
depended on and hidden bugs.
Whatever. The patch _looks_ sensible to me. The only users of
ldisc->users are:
- get_ldisc() - atomically increment the count
- put_ldisc() - atomically decrements the count and releases if zero
- tty_ldisc_try_get() - creates the ldisc, and sets the count to 1.
The ldisc should then either be released, or be attached to a tty.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@mail.by>
Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2009-08-03 11:11:19 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-08-03 14:54:56 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into a proper refcount
By using the user count for the actual lifetime rules, we can get rid of
the silly "wait_for_idle" logic, because any busy ldisc will
automatically stay around until the last user releases it. This avoids
a host of odd issues, and simplifies the code.
So now, when the last ldisc reference is dropped, we just release the
ldisc operations struct reference, and free the ldisc.
It looks obvious enough, and it does work for me, but the counting
_could_ be off. It probably isn't (bad counting in the new version would
generally imply that the old code did something really bad, like free an
ldisc with a non-zero count), but it does need some testing, and
preferably somebody looking at it.
With this change, both 'tty_ldisc_put()' and 'tty_ldisc_deref()' are
just aliases for the new ref-counting 'put_ldisc()'. Both of them
decrement the ldisc user count and free it if it goes down to zero.
They're identical functions, in other words.
But the reason they still exist as sepate functions is that one of them
was exported (tty_ldisc_deref) and had a stupid name (so I don't want to
use it as the main name), and the other one was used in multiple places
(and I didn't want to make the patch larger just to rename the users).
In addition to the refcounting, I did do some minimal cleanup. For
example, now "tty_ldisc_try()" actually returns the ldisc it got under
the lock, rather than returning true/false and then the caller would
look up the ldisc again (now without the protection of the lock).
That said, there's tons of dubious use of 'tty->ldisc' without obviously
proper locking or refcounting left. I expressly did _not_ want to try to
fix it all, keeping the patch minimal. There may or may not be bugs in
that kind of code, but they wouldn't be _new_ bugs.
That said, even if the bugs aren't new, the timing and lifetime will
change. For example, some silly code may depend on the 'tty->ldisc'
pointer not changing because they hold a refcount on the 'ldisc'. And
that's no longer true - if you hold a ref on the ldisc, the 'ldisc'
itself is safe, but tty->ldisc may change.
So the proper locking (remains) to hold tty->ldisc_mutex if you expect
tty->ldisc to be stable. That's not really a _new_ rule, but it's an
example of something that the old code might have unintentionally
depended on and hidden bugs.
Whatever. The patch _looks_ sensible to me. The only users of
ldisc->users are:
- get_ldisc() - atomically increment the count
- put_ldisc() - atomically decrements the count and releases if zero
- tty_ldisc_try_get() - creates the ldisc, and sets the count to 1.
The ldisc should then either be released, or be attached to a tty.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@mail.by>
Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2009-08-03 11:11:19 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2009-08-03 14:54:56 -07:00
|
|
|
|
tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into a proper refcount
By using the user count for the actual lifetime rules, we can get rid of
the silly "wait_for_idle" logic, because any busy ldisc will
automatically stay around until the last user releases it. This avoids
a host of odd issues, and simplifies the code.
So now, when the last ldisc reference is dropped, we just release the
ldisc operations struct reference, and free the ldisc.
It looks obvious enough, and it does work for me, but the counting
_could_ be off. It probably isn't (bad counting in the new version would
generally imply that the old code did something really bad, like free an
ldisc with a non-zero count), but it does need some testing, and
preferably somebody looking at it.
With this change, both 'tty_ldisc_put()' and 'tty_ldisc_deref()' are
just aliases for the new ref-counting 'put_ldisc()'. Both of them
decrement the ldisc user count and free it if it goes down to zero.
They're identical functions, in other words.
But the reason they still exist as sepate functions is that one of them
was exported (tty_ldisc_deref) and had a stupid name (so I don't want to
use it as the main name), and the other one was used in multiple places
(and I didn't want to make the patch larger just to rename the users).
In addition to the refcounting, I did do some minimal cleanup. For
example, now "tty_ldisc_try()" actually returns the ldisc it got under
the lock, rather than returning true/false and then the caller would
look up the ldisc again (now without the protection of the lock).
That said, there's tons of dubious use of 'tty->ldisc' without obviously
proper locking or refcounting left. I expressly did _not_ want to try to
fix it all, keeping the patch minimal. There may or may not be bugs in
that kind of code, but they wouldn't be _new_ bugs.
That said, even if the bugs aren't new, the timing and lifetime will
change. For example, some silly code may depend on the 'tty->ldisc'
pointer not changing because they hold a refcount on the 'ldisc'. And
that's no longer true - if you hold a ref on the ldisc, the 'ldisc'
itself is safe, but tty->ldisc may change.
So the proper locking (remains) to hold tty->ldisc_mutex if you expect
tty->ldisc to be stable. That's not really a _new_ rule, but it's an
example of something that the old code might have unintentionally
depended on and hidden bugs.
Whatever. The patch _looks_ sensible to me. The only users of
ldisc->users are:
- get_ldisc() - atomically increment the count
- put_ldisc() - atomically decrements the count and releases if zero
- tty_ldisc_try_get() - creates the ldisc, and sets the count to 1.
The ldisc should then either be released, or be attached to a tty.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@mail.by>
Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2009-08-03 11:11:19 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-08-03 16:00:15 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-08-03 16:01:28 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-08-03 16:01:28 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-08-03 16:01:28 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-08-03 16:01:28 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:51:41 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:51:41 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-08-03 16:00:15 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:51:41 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-08-03 16:00:15 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-08-03 16:00:15 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-16 17:00:26 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into a proper refcount
By using the user count for the actual lifetime rules, we can get rid of
the silly "wait_for_idle" logic, because any busy ldisc will
automatically stay around until the last user releases it. This avoids
a host of odd issues, and simplifies the code.
So now, when the last ldisc reference is dropped, we just release the
ldisc operations struct reference, and free the ldisc.
It looks obvious enough, and it does work for me, but the counting
_could_ be off. It probably isn't (bad counting in the new version would
generally imply that the old code did something really bad, like free an
ldisc with a non-zero count), but it does need some testing, and
preferably somebody looking at it.
With this change, both 'tty_ldisc_put()' and 'tty_ldisc_deref()' are
just aliases for the new ref-counting 'put_ldisc()'. Both of them
decrement the ldisc user count and free it if it goes down to zero.
They're identical functions, in other words.
But the reason they still exist as sepate functions is that one of them
was exported (tty_ldisc_deref) and had a stupid name (so I don't want to
use it as the main name), and the other one was used in multiple places
(and I didn't want to make the patch larger just to rename the users).
In addition to the refcounting, I did do some minimal cleanup. For
example, now "tty_ldisc_try()" actually returns the ldisc it got under
the lock, rather than returning true/false and then the caller would
look up the ldisc again (now without the protection of the lock).
That said, there's tons of dubious use of 'tty->ldisc' without obviously
proper locking or refcounting left. I expressly did _not_ want to try to
fix it all, keeping the patch minimal. There may or may not be bugs in
that kind of code, but they wouldn't be _new_ bugs.
That said, even if the bugs aren't new, the timing and lifetime will
change. For example, some silly code may depend on the 'tty->ldisc'
pointer not changing because they hold a refcount on the 'ldisc'. And
that's no longer true - if you hold a ref on the ldisc, the 'ldisc'
itself is safe, but tty->ldisc may change.
So the proper locking (remains) to hold tty->ldisc_mutex if you expect
tty->ldisc to be stable. That's not really a _new_ rule, but it's an
example of something that the old code might have unintentionally
depended on and hidden bugs.
Whatever. The patch _looks_ sensible to me. The only users of
ldisc->users are:
- get_ldisc() - atomically increment the count
- put_ldisc() - atomically decrements the count and releases if zero
- tty_ldisc_try_get() - creates the ldisc, and sets the count to 1.
The ldisc should then either be released, or be attached to a tty.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@mail.by>
Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2009-08-03 11:11:19 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into a proper refcount
By using the user count for the actual lifetime rules, we can get rid of
the silly "wait_for_idle" logic, because any busy ldisc will
automatically stay around until the last user releases it. This avoids
a host of odd issues, and simplifies the code.
So now, when the last ldisc reference is dropped, we just release the
ldisc operations struct reference, and free the ldisc.
It looks obvious enough, and it does work for me, but the counting
_could_ be off. It probably isn't (bad counting in the new version would
generally imply that the old code did something really bad, like free an
ldisc with a non-zero count), but it does need some testing, and
preferably somebody looking at it.
With this change, both 'tty_ldisc_put()' and 'tty_ldisc_deref()' are
just aliases for the new ref-counting 'put_ldisc()'. Both of them
decrement the ldisc user count and free it if it goes down to zero.
They're identical functions, in other words.
But the reason they still exist as sepate functions is that one of them
was exported (tty_ldisc_deref) and had a stupid name (so I don't want to
use it as the main name), and the other one was used in multiple places
(and I didn't want to make the patch larger just to rename the users).
In addition to the refcounting, I did do some minimal cleanup. For
example, now "tty_ldisc_try()" actually returns the ldisc it got under
the lock, rather than returning true/false and then the caller would
look up the ldisc again (now without the protection of the lock).
That said, there's tons of dubious use of 'tty->ldisc' without obviously
proper locking or refcounting left. I expressly did _not_ want to try to
fix it all, keeping the patch minimal. There may or may not be bugs in
that kind of code, but they wouldn't be _new_ bugs.
That said, even if the bugs aren't new, the timing and lifetime will
change. For example, some silly code may depend on the 'tty->ldisc'
pointer not changing because they hold a refcount on the 'ldisc'. And
that's no longer true - if you hold a ref on the ldisc, the 'ldisc'
itself is safe, but tty->ldisc may change.
So the proper locking (remains) to hold tty->ldisc_mutex if you expect
tty->ldisc to be stable. That's not really a _new_ rule, but it's an
example of something that the old code might have unintentionally
depended on and hidden bugs.
Whatever. The patch _looks_ sensible to me. The only users of
ldisc->users are:
- get_ldisc() - atomically increment the count
- put_ldisc() - atomically decrements the count and releases if zero
- tty_ldisc_try_get() - creates the ldisc, and sets the count to 1.
The ldisc should then either be released, or be attached to a tty.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@mail.by>
Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2009-08-03 11:11:19 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into a proper refcount
By using the user count for the actual lifetime rules, we can get rid of
the silly "wait_for_idle" logic, because any busy ldisc will
automatically stay around until the last user releases it. This avoids
a host of odd issues, and simplifies the code.
So now, when the last ldisc reference is dropped, we just release the
ldisc operations struct reference, and free the ldisc.
It looks obvious enough, and it does work for me, but the counting
_could_ be off. It probably isn't (bad counting in the new version would
generally imply that the old code did something really bad, like free an
ldisc with a non-zero count), but it does need some testing, and
preferably somebody looking at it.
With this change, both 'tty_ldisc_put()' and 'tty_ldisc_deref()' are
just aliases for the new ref-counting 'put_ldisc()'. Both of them
decrement the ldisc user count and free it if it goes down to zero.
They're identical functions, in other words.
But the reason they still exist as sepate functions is that one of them
was exported (tty_ldisc_deref) and had a stupid name (so I don't want to
use it as the main name), and the other one was used in multiple places
(and I didn't want to make the patch larger just to rename the users).
In addition to the refcounting, I did do some minimal cleanup. For
example, now "tty_ldisc_try()" actually returns the ldisc it got under
the lock, rather than returning true/false and then the caller would
look up the ldisc again (now without the protection of the lock).
That said, there's tons of dubious use of 'tty->ldisc' without obviously
proper locking or refcounting left. I expressly did _not_ want to try to
fix it all, keeping the patch minimal. There may or may not be bugs in
that kind of code, but they wouldn't be _new_ bugs.
That said, even if the bugs aren't new, the timing and lifetime will
change. For example, some silly code may depend on the 'tty->ldisc'
pointer not changing because they hold a refcount on the 'ldisc'. And
that's no longer true - if you hold a ref on the ldisc, the 'ldisc'
itself is safe, but tty->ldisc may change.
So the proper locking (remains) to hold tty->ldisc_mutex if you expect
tty->ldisc to be stable. That's not really a _new_ rule, but it's an
example of something that the old code might have unintentionally
depended on and hidden bugs.
Whatever. The patch _looks_ sensible to me. The only users of
ldisc->users are:
- get_ldisc() - atomically increment the count
- put_ldisc() - atomically decrements the count and releases if zero
- tty_ldisc_try_get() - creates the ldisc, and sets the count to 1.
The ldisc should then either be released, or be attached to a tty.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@mail.by>
Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2009-08-03 11:11:19 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into a proper refcount
By using the user count for the actual lifetime rules, we can get rid of
the silly "wait_for_idle" logic, because any busy ldisc will
automatically stay around until the last user releases it. This avoids
a host of odd issues, and simplifies the code.
So now, when the last ldisc reference is dropped, we just release the
ldisc operations struct reference, and free the ldisc.
It looks obvious enough, and it does work for me, but the counting
_could_ be off. It probably isn't (bad counting in the new version would
generally imply that the old code did something really bad, like free an
ldisc with a non-zero count), but it does need some testing, and
preferably somebody looking at it.
With this change, both 'tty_ldisc_put()' and 'tty_ldisc_deref()' are
just aliases for the new ref-counting 'put_ldisc()'. Both of them
decrement the ldisc user count and free it if it goes down to zero.
They're identical functions, in other words.
But the reason they still exist as sepate functions is that one of them
was exported (tty_ldisc_deref) and had a stupid name (so I don't want to
use it as the main name), and the other one was used in multiple places
(and I didn't want to make the patch larger just to rename the users).
In addition to the refcounting, I did do some minimal cleanup. For
example, now "tty_ldisc_try()" actually returns the ldisc it got under
the lock, rather than returning true/false and then the caller would
look up the ldisc again (now without the protection of the lock).
That said, there's tons of dubious use of 'tty->ldisc' without obviously
proper locking or refcounting left. I expressly did _not_ want to try to
fix it all, keeping the patch minimal. There may or may not be bugs in
that kind of code, but they wouldn't be _new_ bugs.
That said, even if the bugs aren't new, the timing and lifetime will
change. For example, some silly code may depend on the 'tty->ldisc'
pointer not changing because they hold a refcount on the 'ldisc'. And
that's no longer true - if you hold a ref on the ldisc, the 'ldisc'
itself is safe, but tty->ldisc may change.
So the proper locking (remains) to hold tty->ldisc_mutex if you expect
tty->ldisc to be stable. That's not really a _new_ rule, but it's an
example of something that the old code might have unintentionally
depended on and hidden bugs.
Whatever. The patch _looks_ sensible to me. The only users of
ldisc->users are:
- get_ldisc() - atomically increment the count
- put_ldisc() - atomically decrements the count and releases if zero
- tty_ldisc_try_get() - creates the ldisc, and sets the count to 1.
The ldisc should then either be released, or be attached to a tty.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@mail.by>
Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2009-08-03 11:11:19 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into a proper refcount
By using the user count for the actual lifetime rules, we can get rid of
the silly "wait_for_idle" logic, because any busy ldisc will
automatically stay around until the last user releases it. This avoids
a host of odd issues, and simplifies the code.
So now, when the last ldisc reference is dropped, we just release the
ldisc operations struct reference, and free the ldisc.
It looks obvious enough, and it does work for me, but the counting
_could_ be off. It probably isn't (bad counting in the new version would
generally imply that the old code did something really bad, like free an
ldisc with a non-zero count), but it does need some testing, and
preferably somebody looking at it.
With this change, both 'tty_ldisc_put()' and 'tty_ldisc_deref()' are
just aliases for the new ref-counting 'put_ldisc()'. Both of them
decrement the ldisc user count and free it if it goes down to zero.
They're identical functions, in other words.
But the reason they still exist as sepate functions is that one of them
was exported (tty_ldisc_deref) and had a stupid name (so I don't want to
use it as the main name), and the other one was used in multiple places
(and I didn't want to make the patch larger just to rename the users).
In addition to the refcounting, I did do some minimal cleanup. For
example, now "tty_ldisc_try()" actually returns the ldisc it got under
the lock, rather than returning true/false and then the caller would
look up the ldisc again (now without the protection of the lock).
That said, there's tons of dubious use of 'tty->ldisc' without obviously
proper locking or refcounting left. I expressly did _not_ want to try to
fix it all, keeping the patch minimal. There may or may not be bugs in
that kind of code, but they wouldn't be _new_ bugs.
That said, even if the bugs aren't new, the timing and lifetime will
change. For example, some silly code may depend on the 'tty->ldisc'
pointer not changing because they hold a refcount on the 'ldisc'. And
that's no longer true - if you hold a ref on the ldisc, the 'ldisc'
itself is safe, but tty->ldisc may change.
So the proper locking (remains) to hold tty->ldisc_mutex if you expect
tty->ldisc to be stable. That's not really a _new_ rule, but it's an
example of something that the old code might have unintentionally
depended on and hidden bugs.
Whatever. The patch _looks_ sensible to me. The only users of
ldisc->users are:
- get_ldisc() - atomically increment the count
- put_ldisc() - atomically decrements the count and releases if zero
- tty_ldisc_try_get() - creates the ldisc, and sets the count to 1.
The ldisc should then either be released, or be attached to a tty.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@mail.by>
Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2009-08-03 11:11:19 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into a proper refcount
By using the user count for the actual lifetime rules, we can get rid of
the silly "wait_for_idle" logic, because any busy ldisc will
automatically stay around until the last user releases it. This avoids
a host of odd issues, and simplifies the code.
So now, when the last ldisc reference is dropped, we just release the
ldisc operations struct reference, and free the ldisc.
It looks obvious enough, and it does work for me, but the counting
_could_ be off. It probably isn't (bad counting in the new version would
generally imply that the old code did something really bad, like free an
ldisc with a non-zero count), but it does need some testing, and
preferably somebody looking at it.
With this change, both 'tty_ldisc_put()' and 'tty_ldisc_deref()' are
just aliases for the new ref-counting 'put_ldisc()'. Both of them
decrement the ldisc user count and free it if it goes down to zero.
They're identical functions, in other words.
But the reason they still exist as sepate functions is that one of them
was exported (tty_ldisc_deref) and had a stupid name (so I don't want to
use it as the main name), and the other one was used in multiple places
(and I didn't want to make the patch larger just to rename the users).
In addition to the refcounting, I did do some minimal cleanup. For
example, now "tty_ldisc_try()" actually returns the ldisc it got under
the lock, rather than returning true/false and then the caller would
look up the ldisc again (now without the protection of the lock).
That said, there's tons of dubious use of 'tty->ldisc' without obviously
proper locking or refcounting left. I expressly did _not_ want to try to
fix it all, keeping the patch minimal. There may or may not be bugs in
that kind of code, but they wouldn't be _new_ bugs.
That said, even if the bugs aren't new, the timing and lifetime will
change. For example, some silly code may depend on the 'tty->ldisc'
pointer not changing because they hold a refcount on the 'ldisc'. And
that's no longer true - if you hold a ref on the ldisc, the 'ldisc'
itself is safe, but tty->ldisc may change.
So the proper locking (remains) to hold tty->ldisc_mutex if you expect
tty->ldisc to be stable. That's not really a _new_ rule, but it's an
example of something that the old code might have unintentionally
depended on and hidden bugs.
Whatever. The patch _looks_ sensible to me. The only users of
ldisc->users are:
- get_ldisc() - atomically increment the count
- put_ldisc() - atomically decrements the count and releases if zero
- tty_ldisc_try_get() - creates the ldisc, and sets the count to 1.
The ldisc should then either be released, or be attached to a tty.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@mail.by>
Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2009-08-03 11:11:19 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into a proper refcount
By using the user count for the actual lifetime rules, we can get rid of
the silly "wait_for_idle" logic, because any busy ldisc will
automatically stay around until the last user releases it. This avoids
a host of odd issues, and simplifies the code.
So now, when the last ldisc reference is dropped, we just release the
ldisc operations struct reference, and free the ldisc.
It looks obvious enough, and it does work for me, but the counting
_could_ be off. It probably isn't (bad counting in the new version would
generally imply that the old code did something really bad, like free an
ldisc with a non-zero count), but it does need some testing, and
preferably somebody looking at it.
With this change, both 'tty_ldisc_put()' and 'tty_ldisc_deref()' are
just aliases for the new ref-counting 'put_ldisc()'. Both of them
decrement the ldisc user count and free it if it goes down to zero.
They're identical functions, in other words.
But the reason they still exist as sepate functions is that one of them
was exported (tty_ldisc_deref) and had a stupid name (so I don't want to
use it as the main name), and the other one was used in multiple places
(and I didn't want to make the patch larger just to rename the users).
In addition to the refcounting, I did do some minimal cleanup. For
example, now "tty_ldisc_try()" actually returns the ldisc it got under
the lock, rather than returning true/false and then the caller would
look up the ldisc again (now without the protection of the lock).
That said, there's tons of dubious use of 'tty->ldisc' without obviously
proper locking or refcounting left. I expressly did _not_ want to try to
fix it all, keeping the patch minimal. There may or may not be bugs in
that kind of code, but they wouldn't be _new_ bugs.
That said, even if the bugs aren't new, the timing and lifetime will
change. For example, some silly code may depend on the 'tty->ldisc'
pointer not changing because they hold a refcount on the 'ldisc'. And
that's no longer true - if you hold a ref on the ldisc, the 'ldisc'
itself is safe, but tty->ldisc may change.
So the proper locking (remains) to hold tty->ldisc_mutex if you expect
tty->ldisc to be stable. That's not really a _new_ rule, but it's an
example of something that the old code might have unintentionally
depended on and hidden bugs.
Whatever. The patch _looks_ sensible to me. The only users of
ldisc->users are:
- get_ldisc() - atomically increment the count
- put_ldisc() - atomically decrements the count and releases if zero
- tty_ldisc_try_get() - creates the ldisc, and sets the count to 1.
The ldisc should then either be released, or be attached to a tty.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@mail.by>
Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2009-08-03 11:11:19 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tty-ldisc: turn ldisc user count into a proper refcount
By using the user count for the actual lifetime rules, we can get rid of
the silly "wait_for_idle" logic, because any busy ldisc will
automatically stay around until the last user releases it. This avoids
a host of odd issues, and simplifies the code.
So now, when the last ldisc reference is dropped, we just release the
ldisc operations struct reference, and free the ldisc.
It looks obvious enough, and it does work for me, but the counting
_could_ be off. It probably isn't (bad counting in the new version would
generally imply that the old code did something really bad, like free an
ldisc with a non-zero count), but it does need some testing, and
preferably somebody looking at it.
With this change, both 'tty_ldisc_put()' and 'tty_ldisc_deref()' are
just aliases for the new ref-counting 'put_ldisc()'. Both of them
decrement the ldisc user count and free it if it goes down to zero.
They're identical functions, in other words.
But the reason they still exist as sepate functions is that one of them
was exported (tty_ldisc_deref) and had a stupid name (so I don't want to
use it as the main name), and the other one was used in multiple places
(and I didn't want to make the patch larger just to rename the users).
In addition to the refcounting, I did do some minimal cleanup. For
example, now "tty_ldisc_try()" actually returns the ldisc it got under
the lock, rather than returning true/false and then the caller would
look up the ldisc again (now without the protection of the lock).
That said, there's tons of dubious use of 'tty->ldisc' without obviously
proper locking or refcounting left. I expressly did _not_ want to try to
fix it all, keeping the patch minimal. There may or may not be bugs in
that kind of code, but they wouldn't be _new_ bugs.
That said, even if the bugs aren't new, the timing and lifetime will
change. For example, some silly code may depend on the 'tty->ldisc'
pointer not changing because they hold a refcount on the 'ldisc'. And
that's no longer true - if you hold a ref on the ldisc, the 'ldisc'
itself is safe, but tty->ldisc may change.
So the proper locking (remains) to hold tty->ldisc_mutex if you expect
tty->ldisc to be stable. That's not really a _new_ rule, but it's an
example of something that the old code might have unintentionally
depended on and hidden bugs.
Whatever. The patch _looks_ sensible to me. The only users of
ldisc->users are:
- get_ldisc() - atomically increment the count
- put_ldisc() - atomically decrements the count and releases if zero
- tty_ldisc_try_get() - creates the ldisc, and sets the count to 1.
The ldisc should then either be released, or be attached to a tty.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@mail.by>
Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2009-08-03 11:11:19 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-01-02 13:44:56 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-01-02 13:44:56 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-01-02 13:44:56 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:58 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-11-30 13:18:35 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:51:41 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:48:02 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:48:02 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tty: make sure to flush any pending work when halting the ldisc
When I rewrote tty ldisc code to use proper reference counts (commits
65b770468e98 and cbe9352fa08f) in order to avoid a race with hangup, the
test-program that Eric Biederman used to trigger the original problem
seems to have exposed another long-standing bug: the hangup code did the
'tty_ldisc_halt()' to stop any buffer flushing activity, but unlike the
other call sites it never actually flushed any pending work.
As a result, if you get just the right timing, the pending work may be
just about to execute (ie the timer has already triggered and thus
cancel_delayed_work() was a no-op), when we then re-initialize the ldisc
from under it.
That, in turn, results in various random problems, usually seen as a
NULL pointer dereference in run_timer_softirq() or a BUG() in
worker_thread (but it can be almost anything).
Fix it by adding the required 'flush_scheduled_work()' after doing the
tty_ldisc_halt() (this also requires us to move the ldisc halt to before
taking the ldisc mutex in order to avoid a deadlock with the workqueue
executing do_tty_hangup, which requires the mutex).
The locking should be cleaned up one day (the requirement to do this
outside the ldisc_mutex is very annoying, and weakens the lock), but
that's a larger and separate undertaking.
Reported-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Tested-by: Xiaotian Feng <xtfeng@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@gmail.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-08-25 09:12:43 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:48:02 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:48:02 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tty: Avoid dropping ldisc_mutex over hangup tty re-initialization
A couple of people have hit the WARN_ON() in drivers/char/tty_io.c,
tty_open() that is unhappy about seeing the tty line discipline go away
during the tty hangup. See for example
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14255
and the reason is that we do the tty_ldisc_halt() outside the
ldisc_mutex in order to be able to flush the scheduled work without a
deadlock with vhangup_work.
However, it turns out that we can solve this particular case by
- using "cancel_delayed_work_sync()" in tty_ldisc_halt(), which waits
for just the particular work, rather than synchronizing with any
random outstanding pending work.
This won't deadlock, since the buf.work we synchronize with doesn't
care about the ldisc_mutex, it just flushes the tty ldisc buffers.
- realize that for this particular case, we don't need to wait for any
hangup work, because we are inside the hangup codepaths ourselves.
so as a result we can just drop the flush_scheduled_work() entirely, and
then move the tty_ldisc_halt() call to inside the mutex. That way we
never expose the partially torn down ldisc state to tty_open(), and hold
the ldisc_mutex over the whole sequence.
Reported-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Reported-by: Heinz Diehl <htd@fancy-poultry.org>
Cc: stable@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-10-03 21:44:21 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:48:02 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-11-30 13:18:29 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-11-30 13:18:29 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-11-30 13:18:35 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-11-30 13:18:29 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:51:41 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-11-30 13:18:29 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-01-02 13:44:56 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-11-30 13:18:29 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-11-30 13:18:29 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-11-30 13:18:29 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-08 10:09:26 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2010-02-08 10:09:26 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-08 10:09:26 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-08 10:09:26 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-08 10:09:26 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-08 10:09:26 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-08 10:09:26 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2010-02-08 10:09:26 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-07-16 16:05:08 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-08 10:09:26 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2010-02-08 10:09:26 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:51:41 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:48:02 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-07-16 16:05:08 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-29 15:21:47 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-29 15:21:47 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-07-16 16:05:08 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-29 15:21:47 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-11 12:50:12 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-22 11:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
