On Sun, 2015-09-20 at 15:07 -0400, Aaron Conole wrote: > Eric Dumazet <eric.duma...@gmail.com> writes: > > > On Sun, 2015-09-20 at 05:18 -0400, Aaron Conole wrote: > >> From: Aaron Conole <aa...@bytheb.org> > >> > > > > I am wondering what this is expected to do, and how this code would > > possibly not trigger a crash. > Are you suspecting it should crash from a possible double-lock case? > On line 2125, there is an unconditional unlock, which should be > guaranteeing that there is no longer a condition to 'double lock' the > socket.
Not at all. I am suggesting there is a big difference between unix_state_lock(&sk); and unix_state_lock(sk); Can you see it ? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
