> This fixes it by checking sk->sk_shutdown(suggested by Stefano) after > lock_sock since sk->sk_shutdown is set to SHUTDOWN_MASK under the > protection of lock_sock_nested. How do you think about a wording variant like the following? Thus check the data structure member “sk_shutdown” (suggested by Stefano) after a call of the function “lock_sock” since this field is set to “SHUTDOWN_MASK” under the protection of “lock_sock_nested”. Would you like to add the tag “Fixes” to the commit message? Regards, Markus
