From dabc47de7a23f57522dc762d9d2ad875700d3497 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sunil Mushran <sunil.mushran@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 12:37:15 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] ocfs2/dlm: Use ast_lock to protect ast_list
The code was using dlm->spinlock instead of dlm->ast_lock to protect the
ast_list. This patch fixes the issue.
Signed-off-by: Sunil Mushran <sunil.mushran@oracle.com>
Acked-by: Joel Becker <joel.becker@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.com>
---
fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c b/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c
index 86ca085ef324..fcf879ed6930 100644
--- a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c
+++ b/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c
@@ -117,11 +117,11 @@ static enum dlm_status dlmunlock_common(struct dlm_ctxt *dlm,
else
BUG_ON(res->owner == dlm->node_num);
- spin_lock(&dlm->spinlock);
+ spin_lock(&dlm->ast_lock);
/* We want to be sure that we're not freeing a lock
* that still has AST's pending... */
in_use = !list_empty(&lock->ast_list);
- spin_unlock(&dlm->spinlock);
+ spin_unlock(&dlm->ast_lock);
if (in_use) {
mlog(ML_ERROR, "lockres %.*s: Someone is calling dlmunlock "
"while waiting for an ast!", res->lockname.len,
--
GitLab