[Devel] Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/6]: /dev/tty tweak in init_dev()

[Serge E. Hallyn]

Quoting sukadev at us.ibm.com (sukadev at us.ibm.com):
> Serge E. Hallyn [serue at us.ibm.com] wrote:
> | Quoting sukadev at us.ibm.com (sukadev at us.ibm.com):
> | > 
> | > From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev at us.ibm.com>
> | > Subject: [RFC][PATCH 6/6]: /dev/tty tweak in init_dev()
> | > 
> | > When opening /dev/tty, __tty_open() finds the tty using get_current_tty().
> | > When __tty_open() calls init_dev(), init_dev() tries to 'find' the tty
> | > again from devpts.  Is that really necessary ?
> 
> How about I change the second sentence to:
> 
> 	When __tty_open() later calls init_dev() it passes in this
> 	'current-tty' to _tty_open() in *ret_tty. init_dev() ignores
> 	this and calls devpts again to find the tty.

Ah, thank you, that makes sense.

-serge

> | > The problem with asking devpts again is that with multiple mounts, devpts
> | > cannot find the tty without knowing the specific mount instance. We can't
> | > find the mount instance of devpts, since the inode of /dev/tty is in a
> | > different filesystem.
> | > 
> | > ---
> | >  drivers/char/tty_io.c |    5 ++++-
> | >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> | > 
> | > Index: linux-2.6.26-rc8-mm1/drivers/char/tty_io.c
> | > ===================================================================
> | > --- linux-2.6.26-rc8-mm1.orig/drivers/char/tty_io.c	2008-08-04 17:25:20.000000000 -0700
> | > +++ linux-2.6.26-rc8-mm1/drivers/char/tty_io.c	2008-08-04 17:26:34.000000000 -0700
> | > @@ -2066,7 +2066,10 @@ static int init_dev(struct tty_driver *d
> | > 
> | >  	/* check whether we're reopening an existing tty */
> | >  	if (driver->flags & TTY_DRIVER_DEVPTS_MEM) {
> | > -		tty = devpts_get_tty(inode, idx);
> | > +		if (inode->i_rdev == MKDEV(TTYAUX_MAJOR, 0))
> | > +			tty = *ret_tty;
> | 
> | I don't understand this.  ret_tty is for returning tty.  For instance in
> | _ptmx_open() it's passed in completely uninitialized.  Isn't it
> | dereferenced later in init_dev?
> 
> Yes, it is a quick/dirty fix.  When called from _ptmx_open() inode->i_rdev
> would be [5,2] so, the uninitialized *ret_tty would not be used. 
> 
> Yes, it should be cleaner. I have been thinking of calling get_current_ty()
> again here or renaming the parameter.
> 
> | 
> | And what you're doing here doesn't really match your patch intro, but
> | the patch intro doesn't really say what the patch does, it just lists a
> | problem.  So I'm 100% unclear on what your intent here is.
> 
> I can update the intro as pointed above.  And will add a comment here.
> 
> The point is devpts does not have sufficient information to find the tty
> struct for /dev/tty.  Fortunately, we already have the tty struct in this
> case and don't need to ask devpts
> 
> 
> 
> 
> | 
> | > +		else
> | > +			tty = devpts_get_tty(inode, idx);
> | >  		/*
> | >  		 * If we don't have a tty here on a slave open, it's because
> | >  		 * the master already started the close process and there's
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers