From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751289AbWGHBbB (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jul 2006 21:31:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751293AbWGHBbB (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jul 2006 21:31:01 -0400 Received: from xenotime.net ([66.160.160.81]:20650 "HELO xenotime.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751289AbWGHBbB (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jul 2006 21:31:01 -0400 Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 18:33:48 -0700 From: "Randy.Dunlap" To: "Jon Smirl" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, paulkf@microgate.com, akpm@osdl.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Ref counting for tty_struct and some locking clean up Message-Id: <20060707183348.157cc272.rdunlap@xenotime.net> In-Reply-To: <9e4733910607071737n1bd01042u92b895edaceb73db@mail.gmail.com> References: <9e4733910607071737n1bd01042u92b895edaceb73db@mail.gmail.com> Organization: YPO4 X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.6 (GTK+ 2.8.3; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 7 Jul 2006 20:37:36 -0400 Jon Smirl wrote: > This patch removes tty_mutex and replaces it with a ref counted > tty_struct. A new spinlock, tty_lock, serializes tty > creation/destruction. This code thoroughly audits everyone taking > references to tty_struct and tracks them. I have been running it > locally for a few days without any issues. > > If there is a refcount problem it will trigger a WARN_ON. If you hit > one, defining DEBUG_TTY_REFCOUNT will provide plenty of debug info to > help locate the missing reference. I definitely found multiple locking > holes in the old tty_mutex code but they they look hard to hit. > > This is just a first step, if this code proves to be stable I'll do > another round of cleanup. There is room for a lot more work to be > done. Ultimately there may not even be a need for a tty refcount if > everything is locked correctly. But that is a big step and we should > take some smaller ones first. > > This is meant for mm until it gets some testing - I don't want to > break anyone's console. If gmail wraps it let me know and I'll send > you an attachment. It has one wrapped line in it but does not apply cleanly to 2.6.18-rc1 or to 2.6.17-mm6. What was it diffed against? --- ~Randy