From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH: tty-next] TTY: serial: Move mutex_unlock in uart_close
 function
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 15:43:30 -0700
Message-ID: <20110922224330.GA21296@kroah.com>
References: <1314600216-8146-1-git-send-email-nobuhiro.iwamatsu.yj@renesas.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-serial-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]:49153 "EHLO
	out2.smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753777Ab1IVXA6 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-serial@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 22 Sep 2011 19:00:58 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1314600216-8146-1-git-send-email-nobuhiro.iwamatsu.yj@renesas.com>
Sender: linux-serial-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org
To: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <nobuhiro.iwamatsu.yj@renesas.com>
Cc: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@suse.de

On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 03:43:36PM +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> When mutex_lock is not called, mutex_unlock is sometimes called.
> This deletes unnecessary goto and makes modifications so that
> mutex_unlock is called.

No you don't, your patch prevents mutex_unlock() from being called:

> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
> @@ -1262,7 +1262,7 @@ static void uart_close(struct tty_struct *tty, struct file *filp)
>  
>  	if (tty_hung_up_p(filp)) {
>  		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags);
> -		goto done;
> +		return;

Before this mutex_lock() was called, so we need to unlock it, yet you
just prevented that from happening.

So this patch is not correct at all, right?

greg k-h