Re: [patch 1/4] kref: warn kref_put() with unreferenced kref

[Rogier Wolff <R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl>]

On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 04:33:34PM +0800, Akinobu Mita wrote:
> @@ -56,12 +57,13 @@ int kref_put(struct kref *kref, void (*r
>  	 * if current count is one, we are the last user and can release object
>  	 * right now, avoiding an atomic operation on 'refcount'
>  	 */
> -	if ((atomic_read(&kref->refcount) == 1) ||
> -	    (atomic_dec_and_test(&kref->refcount))) {
> -		release(kref);
> -		return 1;
> -	}
> -	return 0;
> +	if (atomic_read(&kref->refcount) == 1)
> +		atomic_set(&kref->refcount, 0);
> +	else if (!atomic_dec_and_test(&kref->refcount))
> +		return 0;

This is WRONG. The refcount can be incremented (to two) AFTER the
atomic_read ==1 and the "atomic_set". The original code seems 
ok in this respect. 

	Roger. 


-- 
** R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl ** http://www.BitWizard.nl/ ** +31-15-2600998 **
*-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --*
Q: It doesn't work. A: Look buddy, doesn't work is an ambiguous statement. 
Does it sit on the couch all day? Is it unemployed? Please be specific! 
Define 'it' and what it isn't doing. --------- Adapted from lxrbot FAQ
-
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/