On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 09:05:13AM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote: > > > Maybe it's just a loose connection but yet, it seems to me that > > operations on id_priv->mc_list should be protected. Should I send a > > different patch? > > "seems ... should be" is very weak justification for locking. What > should they be protected from? >
What if rdma_join_multicast() is called when rdma_destroy_id() - for example from cma_ib_handler() due to error returned from the handler? In this case list_add(&mc->list, &id_priv->mc_list) in rdma_join_multicast() can may be executed along with the list manipulation done in cma_leave_mc_groups(). Generally, it looks strange that in some places list handling is protected with a spinlock and in other places not. _______________________________________________ general mailing list general@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
