From: Evgeniy Polyakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 13:02:41 +0300
> Actually I added sock_async() checks to detect cases, when ucopy is set > somewhere, but socket was marked as async later, so I just use > sock_async() where other cheks could be done. Can you see that these two states are mutually exclusive? It is guarenteed by all the logic surrounding the ucopy code. No packets can be processed except by tp->ucopy.task user. Becuase he locked the socket and had exclusive access to it when tp->ucopy.task pointer was set. If the socket is ever unlocked, and packets are allowed to be processed by other TCP users, tp->ucopy.task will be cleared to NULL. Well, what more can I say to convince you? Perhaps I can suggest to add a BUG_ON(sock_async(sk)) where tp->ucopy.task is non-NULL if you don't believe me :-) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
