From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org-S932240AbVHWRkM@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932240AbVHWRkM (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Tue, 23 Aug 2005 13:40:12 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932243AbVHWRkM
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Tue, 23 Aug 2005 13:40:12 -0400
Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:13796 "EHLO
	pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S932240AbVHWRkK (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 23 Aug 2005 13:40:10 -0400
Subject: Re: some missing spin_unlocks
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: tedu@coverity.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ralf@linux-mips.org
In-Reply-To: <20050823.103010.51024114.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <430A5127.5000304@coverity.com>
	 <20050823.094603.29591786.davem@davemloft.net>
	 <1124816044.3218.18.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
	 <20050823.103010.51024114.davem@davemloft.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 19:40:06 +0200
Message-Id: <1124818806.3218.20.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.2 (2.2.2-5) 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 2.9 (++)
X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.0.4 on pentafluge.infradead.org summary:
	Content analysis details:   (2.9 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL      RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address
	[80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net]
	2.8 RCVD_IN_DSBL           RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org
	[<http://dsbl.org/listing?80.57.133.107>]
X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from <arjan@infradead.org> by pentafluge.infradead.org
	See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 2005-08-23 at 10:30 -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 18:54:03 +0200
> 
> > does it matter? can ANYTHING be spinning on the lock? if not .. can we
> > just let the lock go poof and not unlock it... 
> 
> I believe socket lookup can, otherwise the code is OK as-is.

lookup while the object is in progress of being destroyed sounds really
bad though....