"Catalin Marinas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 09/03/07, Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> If I can manage to focus on this, it looks like the information I need to
>> start fixing this.
>
> I had a look at the second leak reported it seems to be caused by the
> same proc_set_tty() call but, in this case, there is no
> disassociate_tty() call for the task (and the patch I posted is not
> enough). Maybe something like below (no thourough testing):
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/tty_io.c b/drivers/char/tty_io.c
> index db91398..ea6ca7d 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/tty_io.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/tty_io.c
> @@ -3854,7 +3854,14 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(tty_devnum);
>
> void proc_clear_tty(struct task_struct *p)
> {
> + struct tty_struct *tty;
> +
> spin_lock_irq(&p->sighand->siglock);
> + tty = p->signal->tty;
> + if (tty) {
> + put_pid(tty->session);
> + put_pid(tty->pgrp);
> + }
> p->signal->tty = NULL;
> spin_unlock_irq(&p->sighand->siglock);
> }
This patch can't be right. Not the way proc_clear_tty is called
once for each process in the session, plus we aren't clearing
tty->session and tty->pgrp here.
If the above patch works it's a fluke.
Still it is the right general area of the code. I've just started
looking at this it is going to take me a bit to come up to speed on
this code again and see what silly thing is missing.
Eric
-
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/
