On 2012-05-22 13:28, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote:
> Holding of client_mutex looks redundant here - holding of recall_lock looks
> enough.
Looking at the code, agreed.
Benny
>
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Kinsbursky <skinsbursky@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 2 --
> 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> index f004e61..fdef9fc 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> @@ -4744,11 +4744,9 @@ void nfsd_recall_delegations(u64 num)
> {
> unsigned int count;
>
> - nfs4_lock_state();
> spin_lock(&recall_lock);
> count = nfsd_process_n_delegations(num, nfsd_break_one_deleg, NULL);
> spin_unlock(&recall_lock);
> - nfs4_unlock_state();
>
> printk(KERN_INFO "NFSD: Recalled %d delegations", count);
> }
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
