Coverity noted a place where we were not grabbing
the ses_lock when setting (and checking) ses_status.
Addresses-Coverity: 1536833 ("Data race condition (MISSING_LOCK)")
Reviewed-by: Paulo Alcantara (SUSE) <pc@manguebit.com>
Reviewed-by: Bharath SM <bharathsm@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Steve French <stfrench@microsoft.com>
/* ses_count can never go negative */
WARN_ON(ses->ses_count < 0);
+ spin_lock(&ses->ses_lock);
if (ses->ses_status == SES_GOOD)
ses->ses_status = SES_EXITING;
- cifs_free_ipc(ses);
-
if (ses->ses_status == SES_EXITING && server->ops->logoff) {
+ spin_unlock(&ses->ses_lock);
+ cifs_free_ipc(ses);
xid = get_xid();
rc = server->ops->logoff(xid, ses);
if (rc)
cifs_server_dbg(VFS, "%s: Session Logoff failure rc=%d\n",
__func__, rc);
_free_xid(xid);
+ } else {
+ spin_unlock(&ses->ses_lock);
+ cifs_free_ipc(ses);
}
spin_lock(&cifs_tcp_ses_lock);