Re: [cocci] Searching for questionable call pairs (with SmPL)?

[Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>]

> Now I wonder how these diff hunks fit to my source code search approach
> for finding call pairs of known functions (or macros).
> Will another clarification become more interesting?

…
@@ -1613,9 +1608,7 @@ static void handle_uaudio_stream_req(str
                        ret = prepare_qmi_response(subs, req_msg, &resp,
                                                   info_idx);
                if (ret < 0) {
-                       mutex_lock(&chip->mutex);
                        subs->opened = 0;
-                       mutex_unlock(&chip->mutex);
                }
        } else {
                info = &uadev[pcm_card_num].info[info_idx];
…

* How can such a difference display happen at all when it is expected
  that the macro calls “mutex_lock(&qdev_mutex)” and “mutex_lock(&chip->mutex)”
  should be presented before?
  https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.16-rc7/source/sound/usb/qcom/qc_audio_offload.c#L1542-L1583

* The source code search pattern indicates an other unlock call order,
  doesn't it?


Regards,
Markus