Re: TTY: tty_port questions

[Alan Cox]

On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 23:20:01 +0000
Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 11:48:32AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> 
> > > > It will be. In order to fix the tty locking mess we need to shove a lot
> > > > of stuff whose lifetime is the lifetime of the physical port somewhere
> > > > else - the tty_port is that structure.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > "It will be" in terms of "not now"? ;-)
> > 
> > As in, it's the very next step on.
> 
> FWIW, uml console in default config is basically "start xterm for each VC".
> What do you suggest to do on vhangup() on one of those?

What posix says must happen. Which is that the running processes get a
hangup. So a vhangup() would ensure there were no old apps on the UML
guess talking to the xterm (eg stealing login credentials, or abusing
TIOCSTI etc).

The fact it's an xterm isn't really relevant. That's just the physical
interface and vhangup is about breaking the logical link. The xterm would
continue, no reason for it to do otherwise I can see ?

Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/