On Thursday December 7, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> So I took Neils patch, made the change Trond suggested and the result is
> below.
>
> Comments? Ok to merge?
Yes, except that you need a changelog comment at the top. Possibly
based very heavily on the text I wrote, but written to justify the
patch rather than to explain the bug.
NeilBrown
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Neil Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
>
> fs/nfs/file.c | 11 +++++++----
> 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/file.c b/fs/nfs/file.c
> index cc93865..22572af 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/file.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/file.c
> @@ -428,8 +428,8 @@ static int do_vfs_lock(struct file *file
> BUG();
> }
> if (res < 0)
> - printk(KERN_WARNING "%s: VFS is out of sync with lock
> manager!\n",
> - __FUNCTION__);
> + dprintk("%s: VFS is out of sync with lock manager (res =
> %d)!\n",
> + __FUNCTION__, res);
> return res;
> }
>
> @@ -479,10 +479,13 @@ static int do_setlk(struct file *filp, i
> * we clean up any state on the server. We therefore
> * record the lock call as having succeeded in order to
> * ensure that locks_remove_posix() cleans it out when
> - * the process exits.
> + * the process exits. Make sure not to sleep if
> + * someone else holds the lock.
> */
> - if (status == -EINTR || status == -ERESTARTSYS)
> + if (status == -EINTR || status == -ERESTARTSYS) {
> + fl->fl_flags &= ~FL_SLEEP;
> do_vfs_lock(filp, fl);
> + }
> } else
> status = do_vfs_lock(filp, fl);
> unlock_kernel();
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
