https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=221881
--- Comment #1 from Alejandro Colomar ([email protected]) ---
Hi Paolo,
> Date: 2026-08-13 14:20:33+0000
> From: [email protected]
>
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=221881
>
> Bug ID: 221881
> Summary: Documenting if both /dev/ptmx and /dev/pts/ptmx can be
> accessed at the same time.
> Product: Documentation
> Version: unspecified
> Hardware: All
> OS: Linux
> Status: NEW
> Severity: low
> Priority: P3
> Component: man-pages
> Assignee: [email protected]
> Reporter: [email protected]
> Regression: No
>
> Traditionally pseudoterminals are created through the device file /dev/ptmx.
> With the introduction of the devpts virtual filesystem, new slave
> pseudoterminals are created through /dev/pts/ptmx device file and allocated
> in
> /dev/pts/*. In order to mantain backward compatibility, the device file
> /dev/ptmx has not been dropped byt instead requests to /dev/ptmx are
> forwarded
> to /dev/pts/ptmx.
>
> However, this is not preserved by bind mounts to /dev/ptmx: for example,
> after
> launching
>
> "# mount --bind /dev/ptmx /dev/ptmx"
>
> any attempt to opening /dev/ptmx will fail. Instead, bind mounting
> /dev/pts/ptmx works as expected (if devptsfs has previously been mounted with
> ptmxmode=0666). This is quite problematic if one wants to give access to
> /dev/ptmx inside a mount namespace. The solution provided in
> https://docs.kernel.org/filesystems/devpts.html is to remount devptsfs with
> the
> mount option ptmxmode=0666, then remove /dev/ptmx and finally place a bind
> mount or a symlink pointing to /dev/pts/ptmx.
>
> The issues involving documentations are the following:
>
> 1. man 4 pts only describes the old interface /dev/ptmx and the newer defice
> file /dev/pts/ptmx is never mentioned. /dev/pts/ptmx should at least be
> mentioned as an alternative for /dev/ptmx both to help software maintainers
> moving to the new interface and to provide access to pseudoterminals inside
> mount namespaces;
>
> 2. nowhere inside the documentation is explained if it is safe to provide
> access to both /dev/ptmx and /dev/pts/ptmx at the same time. All provided
> scenarios give access to exactly one of /dev/ptmx and /dev/pts/ptmx device
> files. If we have to avoid giving full access to both /dev/ptmx and
> /dev/pts/ptmx through ptmxmode=0666 (to avoid race conditions) then it should
> be explicitly stated. On the contrary, a note that says there are no problems
> in giving full access to both these device files at the same time should be
> added.
If you know how to solve those issues, would you mind sending a patch?
If so, plese have a look at
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/tree/CONTRIBUTING>
and
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/tree/CONTRIBUTING.d/>.
If you don't know these, you could maybe ask through email to the kernel
maintainers of those features, and CC the linux-man@ mailing list, so we
learn that information. (The links above will also help you.)
Have a lovely day!
Alex
--
You may reply to this email to add a comment.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not
affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for
the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.