From: J. Bruce Fields Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 08:55:42 +0000 (+0100) Subject: NLM: Clean up nlmsvc_grant_reply locking X-Git-Tag: v2.6.16-rc1~935^2~4^2~18 X-Git-Url: http://pilppa.com/gitweb/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=f232142cc21127c829559923eb405d1bcb2e2278;p=linux-2.6-omap-h63xx.git NLM: Clean up nlmsvc_grant_reply locking Slightly simpler logic here makes it more trivial to verify that the up's and down's are balanced here. Break out an assignment from a conditional while we're at it. Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust --- diff --git a/fs/lockd/svclock.c b/fs/lockd/svclock.c index 87d09a0d8f6..e42f0cc6c45 100644 --- a/fs/lockd/svclock.c +++ b/fs/lockd/svclock.c @@ -637,11 +637,12 @@ nlmsvc_grant_reply(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nlm_cookie *cookie, u32 status file->f_count++; down(&file->f_sema); - if ((block = nlmsvc_find_block(cookie,&rqstp->rq_addr)) != NULL) { + block = nlmsvc_find_block(cookie, &rqstp->rq_addr); + if (block) { if (status == NLM_LCK_DENIED_GRACE_PERIOD) { /* Try again in a couple of seconds */ nlmsvc_insert_block(block, 10 * HZ); - block = NULL; + up(&file->f_sema); } else { /* Lock is now held by client, or has been rejected. * In both cases, the block should be removed. */ @@ -652,8 +653,6 @@ nlmsvc_grant_reply(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nlm_cookie *cookie, u32 status nlmsvc_delete_block(block, 1); } } - if (!block) - up(&file->f_sema); nlm_release_file(file); }