[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240603163205.84412-1-kuniyu@amazon.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 09:32:05 -0700
From: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>
To: <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
CC: <cong.wang@...edance.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>,
<kuba@...nel.org>, <kuni1840@...il.com>, <kuniyu@...zon.com>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 net 01/15] af_unix: Set sk->sk_state under unix_state_lock() for truly disconencted peer.
From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 09:26:29 -0700
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 07:32:17AM -0700, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote:
> > - if (other != old_peer)
> > + if (other != old_peer) {
> > unix_dgram_disconnected(sk, old_peer);
> > +
> > + unix_state_lock(old_peer);
> > + if (!unix_peer(old_peer))
> > + WRITE_ONCE(old_peer->sk_state, TCP_CLOSE);
> > + unix_state_lock(old_peer);
>
> lock() old_peer twice? Has it been tested? ;-)B
Ugh, apparently no :S (compile-test only)
Should've run the same command in the changelog.
Will fix in v2.
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists