From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932427AbcHIQn7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Aug 2016 12:43:59 -0400 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:40986 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932179AbcHIQn5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Aug 2016 12:43:57 -0400 Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 17:43:48 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Julia Lawall Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kbuild-all@01.org Message-ID: <20160809164348.GD9347@sirena.org.uk> References: <20160809163131.GC9347@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="3Gf/FFewwPeBMqCJ" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Cookie: I can't drive 55. User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2a01:348:6:8808:fab::3 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: drivers/spi/spi.c:1160:3-9: preceding lock on line 1153 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mezzanine.sirena.org.uk); Unknown failure Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --3Gf/FFewwPeBMqCJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 06:35:06PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > On Tue, 9 Aug 2016, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 06:19:13PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > Looks worth checking. > > I don't really have any idea what this is trying to tell me, sorry. > The important lines are the ones with the @. Line 1153 takes a lock and > in line 1160 there is a return in error handling code with the lock still > held. The semantic patch that reported this should also only give a > report if there is some patch out of the function that releases the lock. > Overall, it seems unusual to keep the lock in an error case. I'm not sure how I'm supposed to identify that from the message to be honest - I'd expect something that more directly referenced both lines and ideally said something like "lock held when returning". But yes, it does look like an issue thanks. --3Gf/FFewwPeBMqCJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXqghDAAoJECTWi3JdVIfQqWIH/0Ll/6yJzqA8xz35jLO6FzGI ZCfDiZ+BuHsj8fbtg26v0PgtxmAZZeb5NGEgLKaYJ46E9Dpio2RSmyiXA3efZyIB HArr24RmEf/c19wNoImFgGD0YXL5Br/X+oC65kmut4/foqjBiOcxi2T53FWxw3Ro dHMW6tELmGSW4XZ9EGhOstwo/4I5RtOdfWY8WapNIZ0NVaGfdI+/YgDi0vvFWADr okpddeT4SUSa60A53pSu1sbGNAKGHGE7VahOSKDUd8bspCpPR4Q+MZg1bWI7ZoH0 EMxKdfBkFfp3UhbhlIoUUcMXb5fqkEYAv+8kwBp13ImPu3WYX641BIU6fHD/dV8= =5EiP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --3Gf/FFewwPeBMqCJ--