On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 16:16 +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 02/05/2013 09:20 PM, Peter Hurley wrote:
> > + char cur_n[TASK_COMM_LEN], tty_n[64];
> > + long timeout = 3 * HZ;
> > +
> > + if (tty->ldisc) { /* Not yet closed */
> > + tty_unlock(tty);
> > +
> > + while (tty_ldisc_wait_idle(tty, timeout) == -EBUSY) {
> > + timeout = MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT;
> > + printk_ratelimited(KERN_WARNING
> > + "%s: waiting (%s) for %s took too long, but we
> > keep waiting...\n",
> > + __func__, get_task_comm(cur_n, current),
> > + tty_name(tty, tty_n));
> > }
> > - break;
> > + /* must reacquire both locks and preserve lock order */
> > + mutex_unlock(&tty->ldisc_mutex);
> > + tty_lock(tty);
> > + mutex_lock(&tty->ldisc_mutex);
> > }
> > return !!(tty->ldisc);
^^^^^^^^^^^^
still want me to fix this though?
> > }
>
> Ok, so you do it here. So we can silently ignore the comment on 04/23...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
