Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | Jeff Layton <> | Subject | [PATCH v5 02/14] locks: clean up comment typo | Date | Thu, 9 Jan 2014 09:19:35 -0500 |
| |
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> --- fs/locks.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c index 2cfeea6..5e28612 100644 --- a/fs/locks.c +++ b/fs/locks.c @@ -581,7 +581,7 @@ static void locks_delete_block(struct file_lock *waiter) * it seems like the reasonable thing to do. * * Must be called with both the i_lock and blocked_lock_lock held. The fl_block - * list itself is protected by the file_lock_list, but by ensuring that the + * list itself is protected by the blocked_lock_lock, but by ensuring that the * i_lock is also held on insertions we can avoid taking the blocked_lock_lock * in some cases when we see that the fl_block list is empty. */ -- 1.8.4.2
| |