[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1198874593425-git-send-email-ezk@cs.sunysb.edu>
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 15:42:51 -0500
From: Erez Zadok <ezk@...sunysb.edu>
To: akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
viro@....linux.org.uk, hch@...radead.org,
Erez Zadok <ezk@...sunysb.edu>
Subject: [PATCH 17/30] Unionfs: remove unnecessary locking in follow-link
Signed-off-by: Erez Zadok <ezk@...sunysb.edu>
---
fs/unionfs/inode.c | 6 ++----
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/unionfs/inode.c b/fs/unionfs/inode.c
index 37258c8..7ec9c1b 100644
--- a/fs/unionfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/unionfs/inode.c
@@ -851,7 +851,8 @@ out:
* nor do we need to revalidate it either. It is safe to not lock our
* dentry here, nor revalidate it, because unionfs_follow_link does not do
* anything (prior to calling ->readlink) which could become inconsistent
- * due to branch management.
+ * due to branch management. We also don't need to lock our super because
+ * this function isn't affected by branch-management.
*/
static void *unionfs_follow_link(struct dentry *dentry, struct nameidata *nd)
{
@@ -859,8 +860,6 @@ static void *unionfs_follow_link(struct dentry *dentry, struct nameidata *nd)
int len = PAGE_SIZE, err;
mm_segment_t old_fs;
- unionfs_read_lock(dentry->d_sb);
-
/* This is freed by the put_link method assuming a successful call. */
buf = kmalloc(len, GFP_KERNEL);
if (unlikely(!buf)) {
@@ -885,7 +884,6 @@ static void *unionfs_follow_link(struct dentry *dentry, struct nameidata *nd)
out:
unionfs_check_dentry(dentry);
unionfs_check_nd(nd);
- unionfs_read_unlock(dentry->d_sb);
return ERR_PTR(err);
}
--
1.5.2.2
--
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