tree 72f3e847a2cff031e8d9d7728065716da3ca0be9
parent a302002516a094015e5d004b8d939a8a34559c82
author Gerrit Renker <gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk> 1195949526 -0200
committer David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> 1201560901 -0800

[CCID2]: Remove misleading comment

This removes a comment which identifies an `issue' with dccp_write_xmit() where there is none.
The comment assumes it is possible that a packet is sent between the calls to

	ccid_hc_tx_send_packet(),
	dccp_transmit_skb(),
	ccid_hc_tx_packet_sent()

(in the above order) in dccp_write_xmit().

I think that this is impossible, since dccp_write_xmit() is always called under lock:

 * when called as dccp_write_xmit(sk, 1) from dccp_send_close(), the socket is locked
   (see code comment above dccp_send_close());
 * when called as dccp_write_xmit(sk, 0) from dccp_send_msg(), it is after lock_sock() has been called;
 * when called as dccp_write_xmit(sk, 0) from dccp_write_xmit_timer(), bh_lock_sock() has been called
   and the if/else statement has made sure that sk_lock.owner is not set;
 * there are no other places where dccp_write_xmit() is called.

Furthermore, the debug statement for printing the sequence number of the packet just sent has been
removed, since the entire list is being printed anyway and so the entry of that number appears last.

Signed-off-by: Gerrit Renker <gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Acked-by: Ian McDonald <ian.mcdonald@jandi.co.nz>
Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>