[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1190048620.6700.100.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:03:40 -0400
From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
To: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
devel@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5][NFS] Cleanup explicit check for mandatory locks
On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 11:57 +0400, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> The __mandatory_lock(inode) macro makes the same check, but
> makes the code more readable.
Could we please avoid using underscores in macros. Also, why are we
breaking the usual convention of capitalising macro names?
Cheers
Trond
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
> Cc: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
>
> ---
>
> fs/nfs/file.c | 3 +--
> 1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/file.c b/fs/nfs/file.c
> index 73ddd2e..7a07be1 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/file.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/file.c
> @@ -605,8 +605,7 @@ static int nfs_lock(struct file *filp, i
> nfs_inc_stats(inode, NFSIOS_VFSLOCK);
>
> /* No mandatory locks over NFS */
> - if ((inode->i_mode & (S_ISGID | S_IXGRP)) == S_ISGID &&
> - fl->fl_type != F_UNLCK)
> + if (__mandatory_lock(inode) && fl->fl_type != F_UNLCK)
> return -ENOLCK;
>
> if (IS_GETLK(cmd))
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists