From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=OTc1=Q7=vger.kernel.org=netdev-owner@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D73AC43381
	for <netdev@archiver.kernel.org>; Sun, 24 Feb 2019 06:28:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67])
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0573F20652
	for <netdev@archiver.kernel.org>; Sun, 24 Feb 2019 06:28:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1727955AbfBXG2p (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@archiver.kernel.org>);
        Sun, 24 Feb 2019 01:28:45 -0500
Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:55046 "EHLO
        ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1725928AbfBXG2p (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Sun, 24 Feb 2019 01:28:45 -0500
Received: from viro by ZenIV.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.91 #2 (Red Hat Linux))
        id 1gxnGm-0007Cb-PN; Sun, 24 Feb 2019 06:28:20 +0000
Date:   Sun, 24 Feb 2019 06:28:12 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To:     netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com>
Subject: [Q] why do we ever try to call unix_dgram_peer_wake_disconnect() for
 SOCK_STREAM?
Message-ID: <20190224062803.GG2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org

	What's the point of calling unix_dgram_peer_wake_disconnect() in
unix_release_sock() of SOCK_STREAM/SOCK_SEQPACKET sockets?  AFAICS,
for those we never call unix_dgram_peer_wake_connect(), i.e. ->peer_wake.private
of any non-SOCK_DGRAM socker has to remain NULL.  Which makes that call simply
	spin_lock(&unix_sk(skpair)->peer_wait.lock);
	spin_unlock(&unix_sk(skpair)->peer_wait.lock);
and that doesn't even serve as a barrier for anything else.  Should that
have been
                if (sk->sk_type == SOCK_STREAM || sk->sk_type == SOCK_SEQPACKET) {
                        unix_state_lock(skpair);
                        /* No more writes */
                        skpair->sk_shutdown = SHUTDOWN_MASK;
                        if (!skb_queue_empty(&sk->sk_receive_queue) || embrion)
                                skpair->sk_err = ECONNRESET;
                        unix_state_unlock(skpair);
                        skpair->sk_state_change(skpair);
                        sk_wake_async(skpair, SOCK_WAKE_WAITD, POLL_HUP);
                } else {
			unix_dgram_peer_wake_disconnect(sk, skpair);
		}
or am I missing something subtle here?