On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 04:03:07PM -0700, Stéphane Marchesin wrote: > When quickly restarting X servers, we can run into a situation where > one X server quits while another one starts on the same tty. For a > while, two X servers share the tty, and when the old X server > eventually quits, the tty layer hangs up the tty, which among other > things stubs out the tty's ioctl functions. Later on, the new X > server (which shares the tty functions) tries to call some ioctls > on the tty and fails because they have been replaced with the hungup > versions. This in turn causes the new X server to abort. > > This patch checks the tty->count to make sure we're the last > consumer before hanging up a tty. > > Signed-off-by: Stéphane Marchesin <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/tty/tty_io.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/tty_io.c b/drivers/tty/tty_io.c > index 6464029..62a0f02 100644 > --- a/drivers/tty/tty_io.c > +++ b/drivers/tty/tty_io.c > @@ -619,6 +619,9 @@ static void __tty_hangup(struct tty_struct *tty, int > exit_session) > if (!tty) > return; > > + /* Don't hangup if there are other users */ > + if (tty->count > 1) > + return;
What happens when you have a "real" tty that was hungup because it was disconnected physically from the system yet userspace had a tty open? You want those ttys to be hungup properly, right? Doesn't this change break that? thanks, greg k-h -- 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/
