From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: KVM, fix lock imbalance
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 16:21:00 +0300
Message-ID: <4C347F3C.2010704@redhat.com>
References: <1278507745-32746-1-git-send-email-jirislaby@gmail.com> <20100707130545.GA14934@elte.hu> <4C347C0E.6020107@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, x86@kernel.org,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <4C347C0E.6020107@gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

On 07/07/2010 04:07 PM, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>
>> A cleanliness comment: why is that tear-down/dealloc sequence open-coded? It
>> should be at the end of the function, with goto labels, like we do it in
>> similar cases.
>>      
> Because the lock is around a block only. I usually don't create a goto
> fail-paths in these cases. Do you want one?
>    

In any case, the patch is a minimal fix, so I'll apply it.  Any clean 
ups can go on top.

-- 
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.