Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:54:39 -0400 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] dvb-core: Fix potential mutex_unlock without mutex_lock in dvb_dvr_read | From | Devin Heitmueller <> |
| |
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 22:42:06 +0100 > Simon Arlott <simon@fire.lp0.eu> wrote: > >> >> diff --git a/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/dmxdev.c b/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/dmxdev.c >> >> index c35fbb8..d6d098a 100644 >> >> --- a/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/dmxdev.c >> >> +++ b/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/dmxdev.c >> >> @@ -247,7 +247,7 @@ static ssize_t dvb_dvr_read(struct file *file, char __user *buf, size_t count, >> >> int ret; >> >> >> >> if (dmxdev->exit) { >> >> - mutex_unlock(&dmxdev->mutex); >> >> + //mutex_unlock(&dmxdev->mutex); >> >> return -ENODEV; >> >> } >> > >> > Is there any value in retaining all the commented-out lock operations, >> > or can we zap 'em? >> >> I'm assuming they should really be there - it's just not practical >> because the call to dvb_dmxdev_buffer_read is likely to block waiting >> for data. > > well.. such infomation is much better communicated via a nice comment, > rather than mystery-dead-code?
I'm doing some review of the locking in dvb core as a result of a race condition I found earlier in the week. I'll take a look at this too when I get a few minutes.
Devin
-- Devin J. Heitmueller http://www.devinheitmueller.com AIM: devinheitmueller -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |