Signed-off-by: Sunil Mushran <[email protected]>

Wengang Wang wrote:
> when we check/modify lockres->purge, we should with the protection of 
> lockres->spinlock.
> in dlm_purge_lockres(), the checking/modifying is not with the protectin.
> this patch fixes it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wengang Wang <[email protected]>
> ---
>  fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmthread.c |    6 +++++-
>  1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmthread.c b/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmthread.c
> index d490b66..98569e8 100644
> --- a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmthread.c
> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmthread.c
> @@ -212,14 +212,18 @@ static int dlm_purge_lockres(struct dlm_ctxt *dlm,
>               spin_lock(&dlm->spinlock);
>       }
>  
> +     spin_lock(&res->spinlock);
>       if (!list_empty(&res->purge)) {
>               mlog(0, "removing lockres %.*s:%p from purgelist, "
>                    "master = %d\n", res->lockname.len, res->lockname.name,
>                    res, master);
>               list_del_init(&res->purge);
> +             spin_unlock(&res->spinlock);
>               dlm_lockres_put(res);
>               dlm->purge_count--;
> -     }
> +     } else
> +             spin_unlock(&res->spinlock);
> +
>       __dlm_unhash_lockres(res);
>  
>       /* lockres is not in the hash now.  drop the flag and wake up
>   


_______________________________________________
Ocfs2-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel

Reply via email to