Re: [PATCH v5 28/44] tty: Remove ldsem recursion support

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 08:01:01PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 16:59 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 04:44:48PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
> > > Read lock recursion is no longer required for ldisc references;
> > > remove mechanism.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Peter Hurley <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/tty/tty_ldsem.c   | 83 +++++------------------------------------------
> > >  include/linux/tty_ldisc.h |  2 --
> > >  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 77 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Wait, why did you add something 3 patches ago, only to remove it here?
> > Why not just smush these patches together in the first place?
> 
> >From [PATCH v5 00/44] ldisc patchset...
> 
> On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 16:44 -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: 
> > v5 changes:
> > 
> > After completing an audit of the recursive use of ldisc
> > references, I discovered the _blocking_ recursive acquisition
> > of ldisc references was limited to line disciplines misusing
> > the tty_perform_flush() function.
> > With that now resolved in,
> >   'tty: Fix recursive deadlock in tty_perform_flush()'
> > the recursion design in ldsem has been removed.
> > 
> > The recursion removal is in its own patch,
> >   'tty: Remove ldsem recursion support'
> > to ease review for those that have already reviewed the
> > ldsem implementation.

Ah, ok.  Who reviewed the ldsem implementation?  I didn't see any other
acks on it, or did I miss them?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/