On 24/02/07 18:48, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> Simon Arlott wrote:
>> @@ -673,13 +672,8 @@ static int dvb_demux_open(struct inode *
>> static int dvb_dmxdev_filter_free(struct dmxdev *dmxdev,
>> struct dmxdev_filter *dmxdevfilter)
>> {
>> - if (mutex_lock_interruptible(&dmxdev->mutex))
>> - return -ERESTARTSYS;
>> -
>> - if (mutex_lock_interruptible(&dmxdevfilter->mutex)) {
>> - mutex_unlock(&dmxdev->mutex);
>> - return -ERESTARTSYS;
>> - }
>> + mutex_lock(&dmxdev->mutex);
>> + mutex_lock_interruptible(&dmxdevfilter->mutex);
>
> Assuming that the rest of the patch is OK, shouldn't this be a
> mutex_lock(), too, if the return value will be ignored?
Argh. Sorry, I accidentally reverted my changes and quickly went through them all again so yes, it should have been mutex_lock(). I should now change that on my running copy... which has somehow kept working.
> Regards,
> Andreas
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-dvb mailing list
> linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
--
Simon Arlott
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
