Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:23:32 +0400 | From | Pavel Emelyanov <> | Subject | [PATCH 3/5][9PFS] Use macro instead of explicit check for mandatory locks |
| |
The __MANDATORY_LOCK(inode) macro makes the same check, but makes the code more readable.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org> Cc: Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@gmail.com> Cc: Ron Minnich <rminnich@sandia.gov> Cc: Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@ionkov.net>
---
fs/9p/vfs_file.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/9p/vfs_file.c b/fs/9p/vfs_file.c index 2a40c29..7e75309 100644 --- a/fs/9p/vfs_file.c +++ b/fs/9p/vfs_file.c @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ static int v9fs_file_lock(struct file *f P9_DPRINTK(P9_DEBUG_VFS, "filp: %p lock: %p\n", filp, fl); /* No mandatory locks */ - if ((inode->i_mode & (S_ISGID | S_IXGRP)) == S_ISGID) + if (__MANDATORY_LOCK(inode)) return -ENOLCK; if ((IS_SETLK(cmd) || IS_SETLKW(cmd)) && fl->fl_type != F_UNLCK) { - 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/
| |