Re: [PATCH 1/2] module: make locking more fine-grained.

[AmÃrico Wang]

On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 09:31:42PM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote:
>@@ -783,9 +787,13 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(delete_module, const cha
> 	/* Store the name of the last unloaded module for diagnostic purposes */
> 	strlcpy(last_unloaded_module, mod->name, sizeof(last_unloaded_module));
> 	ddebug_remove_module(mod->name);
>+
>+	/* free_module doesn't want module_mutex held by caller. */
>+	mutex_unlock(&module_mutex);
> 	free_module(mod);
>-
>- out:
>+	goto out_stop;

As Stephen found in linux-next, this line doesn't pass compiling.
I think this line should be just deleted.

>+
>+out:
> 	mutex_unlock(&module_mutex);
> 	return ret;
> }


Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/