lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Mar]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH] Correct a comment error
From
Date
Hi Larry,

There is the same mistake in ocfs2_reflink_inodes_lock(), could you help
fixing them all?

thanks,
Jun

On 2018/2/28 18:17, Larry Chen wrote:
> The function ocfs2_double_lock tries to lock the inode with lower
> blockid first, not lockid.
>
> Signed-off-by: Larry Chen <lchen@suse.com>
> ---
> fs/ocfs2/namei.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/namei.c b/fs/ocfs2/namei.c
> index c801eddc4bf3..30d454de35a8 100644
> --- a/fs/ocfs2/namei.c
> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/namei.c
> @@ -1133,7 +1133,7 @@ static int ocfs2_double_lock(struct ocfs2_super *osb,
> if (*bh2)
> *bh2 = NULL;
>
> - /* we always want to lock the one with the lower lockid first.
> + /* we always want to lock the one with the lower blockid first.
> * and if they are nested, we lock ancestor first */
> if (oi1->ip_blkno != oi2->ip_blkno) {
> inode1_is_ancestor = ocfs2_check_if_ancestor(osb, oi2->ip_blkno,
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-03-01 14:06    [W:1.314 / U:0.640 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site