[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A6676F4.7070201@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 10:18:28 +0800
From: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
To: Danny Feng <dfeng@...hat.com>
CC: Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup: fix reverse unlock sequence in cgroup_get_sb
Danny Feng wrote:
> On 07/22/2009 12:03 AM, Paul Menage wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 3:25 AM, Xiaotian Feng<dfeng@...hat.com> wrote:
>>> In cgroup_get_sb, the lock sequence is:
>>> mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex);
>>> mutex_lock(&cgroup->mutex);
>>> so the last unlock sequence should be:
>>
>> Make this "so for consistency the last ..." ?
>>
>> Maybe make the patch title "Make unlock sequence in cgroup_get_sb
>> consistent" so someone looking through the change logs for fixes to
>> backport doesn't wrongly thing that this fixes any bug"?
>>
>
> Yep, this is a trivial patch. Modified following your suggestion, thank
> you.
>
As far as it's not declared as a fix, I has no objection to this
patch.
Please always inline the patch in the mail body. And when resending
the patch, add the acked-by you collected in it:
Acked-by: Balbir ...
Acked-by: Paul ...
Signed-off-by: Xiaotian ...
You may resend the patch to Andrew Morton, who picks up cgroup
patches, otherwise the patch may be overlooked.
>>> mutex_unlock(&cgroup->mutex);
>>> mutex_unlock(&inode->i_mutex);
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Xiaotian Feng<dfeng@...hat.com>
>>
>> Acked-by: Paul Menage<menage@...gle.com>
>>
>> Paul
>
--
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