[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
On Jun 4, 9:15am, david%l8s.co.uk@localhost (David Laight) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: kern/46522
| While adding a fixed sleep is enough to show where the problem
| lies, it isn't an appropriate solution to the problem.
| You need to properly wait for the close to release a reference
| count on the resource, and then free the relevant data areas.
| The scheduler can always decide to not run the process you
| are waiting for - so the sleep has to be indefinitely long.
| I;m not saying a real fix is easy! the tty subsystem is full
| of places where it isn't remotely MP-safe.
What's the plan here? Is the getty process supposed to be killed, and if
so by whom? I would prefer if instead it got an EOF from the tty and
then it was waited until it exited before the screen was destroyed.
Main Index |
Thread Index |