Re: some missing spin_unlocks

> This one needs more care.  We can't drop the lock, because
> the destroy actions need to be protected by that lock, but
> we can't release the lock after rose_destroy_socket() because
> the object may not even exist any longer.


does it matter? can ANYTHING be spinning on the lock? if not .. can we
just let the lock go poof and not unlock it... 

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: some missing spin_unlocks
    • From: "David S. Miller" <[email protected]>

• References:
  • some missing spin_unlocks
    • From: Ted Unangst <[email protected]>
  • Re: some missing spin_unlocks
    • From: "David S. Miller" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Linux AIO status & todo
• Next by Date: message: do_vfs_lock: VFS is out of sync with lock manager!
• Previous by thread: Re: some missing spin_unlocks
• Next by thread: Re: some missing spin_unlocks
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]