[patch 106/164] arch/x86/kernel: Add missing spin_unlock

Greg KH
2010-07-01T20:52:28Z

2.6.33-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>

commit 84fe6c19e4a598e8071e3bd1b2c923454eae1268 upstream.

Add a spin_unlock missing on the error path. The locks and unlocks are
balanced in other functions, so it seems that the same should be the case
here.

The semantic match that finds this problem is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)

// <smpl>
@@
expression E1;
@@

* spin_lock(E1,...);
<+... when != E1
if (...) {
... when != E1
* return ...;
}
...+>
* spin_unlock(E1,...);
// </smpl>

Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>

---
arch/x86/kernel/amd_iommu.c | 12 +++++++++---
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

--- a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_iommu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_iommu.c
@@ -1419,6 +1419,7 @@ static int __attach_device(struct device
struct protection_domain *domain)
{
struct iommu_dev_data *dev_data, *alias_data;
+ int ret;

dev_data = get_dev_data(dev);
alias_data = get_dev_data(dev_data->alias);
@@ -1430,13 +1431,14 @@ static int __attach_device(struct device
spin_lock(&domain->lock);

/* Some sanity checks */
+ ret = -EBUSY;
if (alias_data->domain != NULL &&
alias_data->domain != domain)
- return -EBUSY;
+ goto out_unlock;

if (dev_data->domain != NULL &&
dev_data->domain != domain)
- return -EBUSY;
+ goto out_unlock;

/* Do real assignment */
if (dev_data->alias != dev) {
@@ -1452,10 +1454,14 @@ static int __attach_device(struct device

atomic_inc(&dev_data->bind);

+ ret = 0;
+
+out_unlock:
+
/* ready */
spin_unlock(&domain->lock);

- return 0;
+ return ret;
}

/*