[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9c10bd38adebd1d83bfa03545ec2db34ec2b56e8.camel@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2020 20:00:09 +0200
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, mptcp@...ts.01.org,
Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/4] mptcp: add MPTCP socket diag interface
On Thu, 2020-07-09 at 10:34 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 15:12:41 +0200 Paolo Abeni wrote:
> > exposes basic inet socket attribute, plus some MPTCP socket
> > fields comprising PM status and MPTCP-level sequence numbers.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Mat Martineau <mathew.j.martineau@...ux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
>
> Any idea why sparse says this:
>
> include/net/sock.h:1612:31: warning: context imbalance in 'mptcp_diag_get_info' - unexpected unlock
>
> ? 🤨
AFAICS, that is a sparse false positive, tied
to unlock_sock_fast() usage.
unlock_sock_fast() conditionally releases the socket lock, according to
it's bool argument, and that fools sparse check: any unlock_sock_fast()
user splats it.
IMHO such warning should be addressed into [un]lock_sock_fast()
function[s] - if possible at all. Outside the scope of this series.
Matthieu suggested adding some comment to note the above, but I boldly
opposed, as current unlock_sock_fast() users don't do that.
Cheers,
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists