Message ID | CAH2r5msH=b0UCkxfXsCEHpqQxkcvJ68qUSD+cy6JeMYi17zsHA@mail.gmail.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | trivial coverity cleanup from multichannel series | expand |
Looks good,
Reviewed-by: Paulo Alcantara (SUSE) <pc@cjr.nz>
On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 8:59 PM Paulo Alcantara <pc@cjr.nz> wrote: > > Looks good, > > Reviewed-by: Paulo Alcantara (SUSE) <pc@cjr.nz> Looks good. But is this the only such occurrence?
There may be others, I have fixed a few, and I am not convinced it is illegal (just presumably better to printk outside of spinlocks, due to the nesting concern, if reasonably possible) - in some cases we have ignored it. On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 10:42 AM Shyam Prasad N <nspmangalore@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 8:59 PM Paulo Alcantara <pc@cjr.nz> wrote: > > > > Looks good, > > > > Reviewed-by: Paulo Alcantara (SUSE) <pc@cjr.nz> > > > Looks good. > But is this the only such occurrence? > -- > Regards, > Shyam
From 95305b4141ece91e77691860b70cdf4d28537a7f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Steve French <stfrench@microsoft.com> Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2021 21:00:08 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] cifs: move debug print out of spinlock It is better to print debug messages outside of the chan_lock spinlock where possible. CC: Shyam Prasad N <sprasad@microsoft.com> Addresses-Coverity: 1493854 ("Thread deadlock") Signed-off-by: Steve French <stfrench@microsoft.com> --- fs/cifs/sess.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/cifs/sess.c b/fs/cifs/sess.c index 2c10b186ed6e..7db8b22edac9 100644 --- a/fs/cifs/sess.c +++ b/fs/cifs/sess.c @@ -95,9 +95,9 @@ int cifs_try_adding_channels(struct cifs_sb_info *cifs_sb, struct cifs_ses *ses) } if (!(ses->server->capabilities & SMB2_GLOBAL_CAP_MULTI_CHANNEL)) { - cifs_dbg(VFS, "server %s does not support multichannel\n", ses->server->hostname); ses->chan_max = 1; spin_unlock(&ses->chan_lock); + cifs_dbg(VFS, "server %s does not support multichannel\n", ses->server->hostname); return 0; } spin_unlock(&ses->chan_lock); -- 2.32.0