From 2b2a3d8b7c699174a642bcbad080767894ce3db2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Julia Lawall Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 12:31:51 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] arch/x86/kernel: Add missing spin_unlock commit 84fe6c19e4a598e8071e3bd1b2c923454eae1268 upstream. Add a spin_unlock missing on the error path. The locks and unlocks are balanced in other functions, so it seems that the same should be the case here. The semantic match that finds this problem is as follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) // @@ expression E1; @@ * spin_lock(E1,...); <+... when != E1 if (...) { ... when != E1 * return ...; } ...+> * spin_unlock(E1,...); // Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- arch/x86/kernel/amd_iommu.c | 12 +++++++++--- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_iommu.c b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_iommu.c index b9ce0fdf2cb5..29e5e6ea0bfb 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_iommu.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_iommu.c @@ -1420,6 +1420,7 @@ static int __attach_device(struct device *dev, struct protection_domain *domain) { struct iommu_dev_data *dev_data, *alias_data; + int ret; dev_data = get_dev_data(dev); alias_data = get_dev_data(dev_data->alias); @@ -1431,13 +1432,14 @@ static int __attach_device(struct device *dev, spin_lock(&domain->lock); /* Some sanity checks */ + ret = -EBUSY; if (alias_data->domain != NULL && alias_data->domain != domain) - return -EBUSY; + goto out_unlock; if (dev_data->domain != NULL && dev_data->domain != domain) - return -EBUSY; + goto out_unlock; /* Do real assignment */ if (dev_data->alias != dev) { @@ -1453,10 +1455,14 @@ static int __attach_device(struct device *dev, atomic_inc(&dev_data->bind); + ret = 0; + +out_unlock: + /* ready */ spin_unlock(&domain->lock); - return 0; + return ret; } /* -- 2.39.5