From 81f2e8adc0fd10847637873dafe8610f3fb4cdff Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: David Howells Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 13:13:47 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] rxrpc: Don't use sk->sk_receive_queue.lock to guard socket state changes Don't use sk->sk_receive_queue.lock to guard socket state changes as the socket mutex is sufficient. Signed-off-by: David Howells cc: Marc Dionne cc: linux-afs@lists.infradead.org --- net/rxrpc/af_rxrpc.c | 4 ---- 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/rxrpc/af_rxrpc.c b/net/rxrpc/af_rxrpc.c index 7a0dc01..8ad4d85 100644 --- a/net/rxrpc/af_rxrpc.c +++ b/net/rxrpc/af_rxrpc.c @@ -812,14 +812,12 @@ static int rxrpc_shutdown(struct socket *sock, int flags) lock_sock(sk); - spin_lock_bh(&sk->sk_receive_queue.lock); if (sk->sk_state < RXRPC_CLOSE) { sk->sk_state = RXRPC_CLOSE; sk->sk_shutdown = SHUTDOWN_MASK; } else { ret = -ESHUTDOWN; } - spin_unlock_bh(&sk->sk_receive_queue.lock); rxrpc_discard_prealloc(rx); @@ -872,9 +870,7 @@ static int rxrpc_release_sock(struct sock *sk) break; } - spin_lock_bh(&sk->sk_receive_queue.lock); sk->sk_state = RXRPC_CLOSE; - spin_unlock_bh(&sk->sk_receive_queue.lock); if (rx->local && rcu_access_pointer(rx->local->service) == rx) { write_lock(&rx->local->services_lock); -- 2.7.4