On Tue, 11 May 2004 15:16:01 -0700 Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 03:09:55PM -0700, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > > I think I get the idea. > > > > What do you think about moving 2.4 on to the 2.6.6 scheme? Not worth it? > > I think the disconnect issues are fixed in 2.4 for now, right? If so, I > doubt it is worth it. I forgot the typical check in the serial_write, thus it is possible to fail there (one of Rudiger's patches added it). In practical terms it's somewhat hard to hit, because a line discipline first calls ->write_room, which does the check. If you're on UP, and copy_from_user does not block in a wrong time, there's no chance for oops. But even if the check were added to serial_write, we would have been vulnerable on SMP still. I did not want to monkey with this coming up to 2.4.26 because I was afraid to derail the post_helper patch by introducing an unrelated regression. Now that it's safely in, I am more enthusiastic about taking good stuff from 2.6. -- Pete ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by Sleepycat Software Learn developer strategies Cisco, Motorola, Ericsson & Lucent use to deliver higher performing products faster, at low TCO. http://www.sleepycat.com/telcomwpreg.php?From=osdnemail3 _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
