> Is there some lock imbalance?: Hmmmm, I'll have to poke at that a bit. > When you send a v2 patch, would you mind also describing what's changed? > If you stick the description here (between the --- and the diff), it'll > be discarded when git applies the patch (which is what we want). Ah. In this case, v1 missed unlocking the rwsem if nfs4_upgrade_open() returned status. > Is there's some particular point that you thought was confusing here? > Then I'm fine with highlighting that. But I don't want to routinely add > these block comments on every little function. Ok. > Code looks OK, though. (And I don't spot the locking problem on a quick > skim...). -- Andrew W. Elble aweits@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Infrastructure Engineer, Communications Technical Lead Rochester Institute of Technology PGP: BFAD 8461 4CCF DC95 DA2C B0EB 965B 082E 863E C912 -- 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
