lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Jul]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [BUGS] [CHECKER] 99 synchronization bugs and a lock summary database
indeed, the code looks different in 2.6.7. definitely not a double unlock
any more, but it seems the new version exit w/ client_sema unheld at line
1616, and w/ the lock held at line 1625. is there a correlation between
the return value with the lock state? -yichen

On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Andrew Morton wrote:

> Yichen Xie <yxie@cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
> >
> > http://glide.stanford.edu/linux-lock/err1.html (69 errors)
>
> nfsd4_open_confirm() looks to be a false positive - judging by the comment:
>
> /*
> * nfs4_unlock_state(); called in encode
> */
>
> the caller of this function is supposed to do nfs4_unlock_state() later on.
>

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [W:0.060 / U:0.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site