On 02/07/2013 04:59 PM, Peter Hurley wrote:
> 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?
It's not worth it. It's up to you.
--
js
suse labs
--
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/
