On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:03:40PM +0200, Benny Halevy wrote: > Otherwise the lockowner may by added to "matches" more than once. Whoops, thanks, looks right. The lo = assignment should probably also be moved up out of this loop. --b. > > Signed-off-by: Benny Halevy <bhalevy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c > index 0874998..84007b6 100644 > --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c > +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c > @@ -4660,6 +4660,7 @@ nfsd4_release_lockowner(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, > if (check_for_locks(stp->st_file, lo)) > goto out; > list_add(&lo->lo_list, &matches); > + break; > } > } > /* Clients probably won't expect us to return with some (but not all) > -- > 1.8.3.1 > -- 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
