Techwizz/kernel-fxtec-pro1x
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity

TTY: serial, move locking in uart_close

Browse source 
So now, when we handle CLOSING flag, there is no point to hold
port->mutex over the start of uart_close.

Yes, there are still several things to reason about:
* port->count etc is and always was protected by a spinlock
* ->stop_rx is protected by a spinlock. Otherwise it would
  race with interrupts.
* uart_wait_until_sent -- that one is already called without
  port->mutex from set_termios and tty_set_ldisc. Should anything
  be protected there, it would be tx_empty. And by a spinlock.
  8250 does this internally...

This step is needed to fix system stalls. To not create an AB-BA lock
dependency (see next patches).

Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
This commit is contained in:
Jiri Slaby 2011-08-25 15:12:05 +02:00 committed by Greg Kroah-Hartman
parent 426929f8d3
commit bafb0bd24d
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

2
drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
View file

@ -1253,7 +1253,6 @@ static void uart_close(struct tty_struct *tty, struct file *filp)
pr_debug("uart_close(%d) called\n", uport->line);
mutex_lock(&port->mutex);
spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags);
if (tty_hung_up_p(filp)) {
@ -1312,6 +1311,7 @@ static void uart_close(struct tty_struct *tty, struct file *filp)
uart_wait_until_sent(tty, uport->timeout);
}
mutex_lock(&port->mutex);
uart_shutdown(tty, state);
uart_flush_buffer(tty);