On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 12:40 +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 02/01/2013 09:39 PM, Peter Hurley wrote: > > On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 16:06 +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote: > >> On 02/01/2013 01:37 PM, Peter Hurley wrote: > >>> On Thu, 2013-01-03 at 15:53 +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote: > >>>> Now, we start converting tty buffer functions to actually use > >>>> tty_port. This will allow us to get rid of the need of tty in many > >>>> call sites. Only tty_port will needed and hence no more > >>>> tty_port_tty_get in those paths. > >>>> > >>>> This is the last one: tty_schedule_flip > >>> > >>> [snip] > >>> > >>>> diff --git a/drivers/tty/vt/keyboard.c b/drivers/tty/vt/keyboard.c > >>>> index 5aace4d..a9af1b9a 100644 > >>>> --- a/drivers/tty/vt/keyboard.c > >>>> +++ b/drivers/tty/vt/keyboard.c > >>>> @@ -307,26 +307,17 @@ int kbd_rate(struct kbd_repeat *rep) > >>>> */ > >>>> static void put_queue(struct vc_data *vc, int ch) > >>>> { > >>>> - struct tty_struct *tty = vc->port.tty; > >>>> - > >>>> tty_insert_flip_char(&vc->port, ch, 0); > >>>> - if (tty) { > >>>> - tty_schedule_flip(tty); > >>>> - } > >>>> + tty_schedule_flip(&vc->port); > >>>> } > >>>> > >>>> static void puts_queue(struct vc_data *vc, char *cp) > >>>> { > >>>> - struct tty_struct *tty = vc->port.tty; > >>>> - > >>>> - if (!tty) > >>>> - return; > >>>> - > >>>> while (*cp) { > >>>> tty_insert_flip_char(&vc->port, *cp, 0); > >>>> cp++; > >>>> } > >>>> - tty_schedule_flip(tty); > >>>> + tty_schedule_flip(&vc->port); > >>>> } > >>> > >>> Umm. So even though the vt driver knows the tty has been shutdown, > >>> keystrokes will still be buffered? And then fed to whichever tty happens > >>> to next get installed on the same port? > >> > >> Unless I completely missed something, they should be flushed. If that's > >> not the case, that's a bug. I will check next week. > > > > Ok. > > > > I'm fairly sure this is happening. Try repeatedly tapping arrow-down > > while booting (I suggest a VM) and you won't be able to login at tty1 > > (ie, text mode). Repeatable 1 time in 5 or so. > > I can reproduce... with 3.0! Are you sure this is new and introduced by > the tty buffers switch?
No, I'm not sure this is new. > > FWIW, I don't agree that the best way is to flush the flip buffers. Why > > buffer and then schedule the cpu to do work which we already know it > > can't do and which we're going to discard anyway? > > Because the drivers needn't care whether there is any tty behind and > listening. This simplifies and speeds up the paths _a lot_. No spin > locks, no ttys around, no two code paths etc. Let's defer this part of the discussion until after everything is running solid. > > In any event, since -next is already carrying these patches, and > > by-design, these patches _expect_ the tty to be NULL, are you going to > > remove the warning in flush_to_ldisc() or shall I? > > I think I don't understand you here, could you elaborate? - CPU 0 - | - CPU 1 - | release_tty() | . | tty->ops->shutdown() | con_shutdown() | . | vc->port.tty = NULL; | . | tty->port->itty = NULL; | . | puts_queue() . | . . | tty_schedule_flip(&vc->port); . | . | | flush_to_ldisc() runs & WARNs If driver i/o paths don't need to worry about the lifetime of the tty, then why warn when they inevitably schedule work to a dead tty (as above)? Also, what ensures that flush_to_ldisc() has a valid tty when obtaining an ldisc ref? IOW, - CPU 0 - | - CPU 1 - | | flush_to_ldisc() | tty = port->itty; | < scheduled away - IRQ servicing ... tty->port->itty = NULL; | . ... | . free_tty_struct(tty); | . | ... returns from IRQ service > | ldisc = tty_ldisc_ref(tty); Regards, Peter Hurley -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/