On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 10:45:11PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > To handle that in DM __lock_fs need to properly unwind and it's caller > must not ignore the return value. OK, I've looked at this properly now. > Question: how does dm_table_presuspend_targets need to be undone? Non-trivially as the code currently stands:-( But as far as I can see, it doesn't currently matter in what order dm_table_presuspend_targets and __lock_fs are called, so the easy way out is to call __lock_fs first. I'll include this version of your patch in the next -dm patchset. Alasdair -- agk@xxxxxxxxxx
