lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Dec]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    Patch in this message
    /
    From
    Subject[PATCH 17/30] Unionfs: remove unnecessary locking in follow-link
    Date
    Signed-off-by: Erez Zadok <ezk@cs.sunysb.edu>
    ---
    fs/unionfs/inode.c | 6 ++----
    1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

    diff --git a/fs/unionfs/inode.c b/fs/unionfs/inode.c
    index 37258c8..7ec9c1b 100644
    --- a/fs/unionfs/inode.c
    +++ b/fs/unionfs/inode.c
    @@ -851,7 +851,8 @@ out:
    * nor do we need to revalidate it either. It is safe to not lock our
    * dentry here, nor revalidate it, because unionfs_follow_link does not do
    * anything (prior to calling ->readlink) which could become inconsistent
    - * due to branch management.
    + * due to branch management. We also don't need to lock our super because
    + * this function isn't affected by branch-management.
    */
    static void *unionfs_follow_link(struct dentry *dentry, struct nameidata *nd)
    {
    @@ -859,8 +860,6 @@ static void *unionfs_follow_link(struct dentry *dentry, struct nameidata *nd)
    int len = PAGE_SIZE, err;
    mm_segment_t old_fs;

    - unionfs_read_lock(dentry->d_sb);
    -
    /* This is freed by the put_link method assuming a successful call. */
    buf = kmalloc(len, GFP_KERNEL);
    if (unlikely(!buf)) {
    @@ -885,7 +884,6 @@ static void *unionfs_follow_link(struct dentry *dentry, struct nameidata *nd)
    out:
    unionfs_check_dentry(dentry);
    unionfs_check_nd(nd);
    - unionfs_read_unlock(dentry->d_sb);
    return ERR_PTR(err);
    }

    --
    1.5.2.2


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-12-28 21:53    [W:0.021 / U:214.108 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site