| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1376483149-7633-2-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 08:25:47 -0400 From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com> To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] locks: clean up comment typo Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com> --- fs/locks.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c index a99adec..9f28359 100644 --- a/fs/locks.c +++ b/fs/locks.c @@ -581,7 +581,7 @@ static void locks_delete_block(struct file_lock *waiter) * it seems like the reasonable thing to do. * * Must be called with both the i_lock and blocked_lock_lock held. The fl_block - * list itself is protected by the file_lock_list, but by ensuring that the + * list itself is protected by the blocked_lock_lock, but by ensuring that the * i_lock is also held on insertions we can avoid taking the blocked_lock_lock * in some cases when we see that the fl_block list is empty. */ -- 1.8.3.1 -- 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