On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 12:28 +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 03:21:51PM +0800, Li Zhong wrote: > > The patch tries to fix following complaint(next-1112) caused by unpaired > > rcu_read_lock/unlock in function prepend_path(): > > Frankly, I wonder if it wouldn't be better to shift rcu_read_unlock() > past the second done_seqretry() in there... Do you mean we have rcu_read_lock/unlock outside of the goto loops? It seems to me it would cause the two locks(mount,rename) potentially acquired inside rcu read lock. Or did I misunderstand something here? Thanks, Zhong > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
