[PATCH 1/2] NET: phy_device, fix lock imbalance

[PATCH 1/2] NET: phy_device, fix lock imbalance

[Jiri Slaby]

Don't forget to unlock a mutex in phy_scan_fixups on a fail path.

Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c |    4 +++-
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c
index eba937c..b10fedd 100644
--- a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c
+++ b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c
@@ -134,8 +134,10 @@ int phy_scan_fixups(struct phy_device *phydev)
 
 			err = fixup->run(phydev);
 
-			if (err < 0)
+			if (err < 0) {
+				mutex_unlock(&phy_fixup_lock);
 				return err;
+			}
 		}
 	}
 	mutex_unlock(&phy_fixup_lock);
-- 
1.6.3.2

[PATCH 2/2] NET: sungem, use spin_trylock_irqsave

[Jiri Slaby]

Use spin_trylock_irqsave instead of open-coded
local_irq_save+spin_trylock.

Impact: cleanup

Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/net/sungem.c |    4 +---
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/sungem.c b/drivers/net/sungem.c
index d2dfe0a..22474a8 100644
--- a/drivers/net/sungem.c
+++ b/drivers/net/sungem.c
@@ -1032,10 +1032,8 @@ static int gem_start_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
 			(csum_stuff_off << 21));
 	}
 
-	local_irq_save(flags);
-	if (!spin_trylock(&gp->tx_lock)) {
+	if (!spin_trylock_irqsave(&gp->tx_lock)) {
 		/* Tell upper layer to requeue */
-		local_irq_restore(flags);
 		return NETDEV_TX_LOCKED;
 	}
 	/* We raced with gem_do_stop() */
-- 
1.6.3.2

Re: [PATCH 2/2] NET: sungem, use spin_trylock_irqsave

[David Miller]

Please DO NOT combine cleanups with real bug fixes into
a patch series.

Bug fixes go to one tree, the rest go to another tree, and that is
especially the case this late in the RC series.

A series of patches are a group of changes that are supposed to be
related and are expected to be applied all to the same tree.  That is
not true of the patches you have posted here.

Re: [PATCH 2/2] NET: sungem, use spin_trylock_irqsave

[David Miller]

From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:23:40 +0200

> -	if (!spin_trylock(&gp->tx_lock)) {
> +	if (!spin_trylock_irqsave(&gp->tx_lock)) {

I'm about to give you a royal flaming.

Any idea why?

(hint: type 'make' before you send patches!!!!)

Re: [PATCH 2/2] NET: sungem, use spin_trylock_irqsave

[Jiri Slaby]

On 07/14/2009 11:10 PM, David Miller wrote:
>> -	if (!spin_trylock(&gp->tx_lock)) {
>> +	if (!spin_trylock_irqsave(&gp->tx_lock)) {
> 
> (hint: type 'make' before you send patches!!!!)

Grr, I did but my bash_history shows that I built wrong subtree. My
apologies.

Re: [PATCH 1/2] NET: phy_device, fix lock imbalance

[David Miller]

From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:23:39 +0200

> Don't forget to unlock a mutex in phy_scan_fixups on a fail path.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>

Applied.