Re: your mail

[Al Viro]

On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 01:21:10AM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:

> @@ -343,7 +267,7 @@ static irqreturn_t line_write_interrupt(int irq, void *data)
>  {
>  	struct chan *chan = data;
>  	struct line *line = chan->line;
> -	struct tty_struct *tty = line->tty;
> +	struct tty_struct *tty = tty_port_tty_get(&line->port);
>  	int err;
>  
>  	/*
> @@ -354,6 +278,9 @@ static irqreturn_t line_write_interrupt(int irq, void *data)
>  	spin_lock(&line->lock);
>  	err = flush_buffer(line);
>  	if (err == 0) {
> +		tty_kref_put(tty);
> +
> +		spin_unlock(&line->lock);
>  		return IRQ_NONE;
>  	} else if (err < 0) {
>  		line->head = line->buffer;
> @@ -365,9 +292,12 @@ static irqreturn_t line_write_interrupt(int irq, void *data)
>  		return IRQ_NONE;
>  
>  	tty_wakeup(tty);
> +	tty_kref_put(tty);
>  	return IRQ_HANDLED;
>  }

That, BTW, smells ugly.  Note that return before the last one has no
tty_kref_put() for a very good reason - it's under if (!tty).  And
just as line->tty, port->tty can become NULL, so tty_port_tty_get()
can, indeed, return NULL here.  Which makes the first tty_kref_put()
oopsable...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/