* tcp_close - why no WARN_ON ?
@ 2011-12-19 12:57 Christoph Paasch
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Christoph Paasch @ 2011-12-19 12:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netdev
Hi all,
I am trying to understand the following code in tcp_close:
sock_orphan(sk);
/* It is the last release_sock in its life. It will remove backlog. */
release_sock(sk);
/* Now socket is owned by kernel and we acquire BH lock
to finish close. No need to check for user refs.
*/
local_bh_disable();
bh_lock_sock(sk);
WARN_ON(sock_owned_by_user(sk));
How is it possible that between release_sock(sk) and local_bh_disable(),
no other thread gets scheduled and calls lock_sock() and thus the
WARN_ON would be triggered ?
Can someone please point me to the lines of code that handle this ?
Thanks a lot,
Christoph
--
Christoph Paasch
PhD Student
IP Networking Lab --- http://inl.info.ucl.ac.be
MultiPath TCP in the Linux Kernel --- http://mptcp.info.ucl.ac.be
Université Catholique de Louvain
--
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2011-12-19 12:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-12-19 12:57 tcp_close - why no WARN_ON ? Christoph Paasch
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.