On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 04:20:51PM +0200, Jan Friesse wrote: > Ryan, > this patch breaks SAF Test SaLckLockGrantCallbackT/10.c, and there is > no close before unlock. I made a patch, but I'm really not sure about > correctness.
Does that patch work? Does it fix that particular test case? It is an interesting idea -- but I am not sure the code can/will ever to this far with a lock that does not exist. I need to think about this a bit more. > Regards, > Honza > > Ryan O'Hara wrote: > > When unlocking a pending lock request, we must send a response (or > > callback) to the library indicating an error occured. This patch > > simply adds a check that the lock is pending before we send the > > response. > > > > Without this fix, callbacks are sent when they are not needed. For > > example, if we close a resource while holding locks we will hit this > > code (in lck_unlock) that will incorrectly send callbacks to the > > library. > > > > Ryan > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Openais mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais > > diff --git a/trunk/services/lck.c b/trunk/services/lck.c > index 0e65ba1..6f85111 100644 > --- a/trunk/services/lck.c > +++ b/trunk/services/lck.c > @@ -1819,9 +1819,8 @@ static void lck_unlock ( > api->timer_delete (resource_lock->timer_handle); > lck_resourcelock_response_send (resource_lock, > SA_AIS_ERR_TIMEOUT); > } > - else { > - lck_lockgrant_callback_send (resource_lock, > SA_AIS_ERR_NOT_EXIST); > - } > + } else { > + lck_lockgrant_callback_send (resource_lock, > SA_AIS_ERR_NOT_EXIST); > } > } > _______________________________________________ Openais mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais
