[Cluster-devel] gfs2: fix skip unlock condition

[David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>]

The recent commit fb6791d100d1bba20b5cdbc4912e1f7086ec60f8
included the wrong logic.  The lvbptr check was incorrectly
added after the patch was tested.

Signed-off-by: David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>
---
 fs/gfs2/lock_dlm.c | 7 ++++++-
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/gfs2/lock_dlm.c b/fs/gfs2/lock_dlm.c
index b906ed1..9802de0 100644
--- a/fs/gfs2/lock_dlm.c
+++ b/fs/gfs2/lock_dlm.c
@@ -281,6 +281,7 @@ static void gdlm_put_lock(struct gfs2_glock *gl)
 {
 	struct gfs2_sbd *sdp = gl->gl_sbd;
 	struct lm_lockstruct *ls = &sdp->sd_lockstruct;
+	int lvb_needs_unlock = 0;
 	int error;
 
 	if (gl->gl_lksb.sb_lkid == 0) {
@@ -294,8 +295,12 @@ static void gdlm_put_lock(struct gfs2_glock *gl)
 	gfs2_update_request_times(gl);
 
 	/* don't want to skip dlm_unlock writing the lvb when lock is ex */
+
+	if (gl->gl_lksb.sb_lvbptr && (gl->gl_state == LM_ST_EXCLUSIVE))
+		lvb_needs_unlock = 1;
+
 	if (test_bit(SDF_SKIP_DLM_UNLOCK, &sdp->sd_flags) &&
-	    gl->gl_lksb.sb_lvbptr && (gl->gl_state != LM_ST_EXCLUSIVE)) {
+	    !lvb_needs_unlock) {
 		gfs2_glock_free(gl);
 		return;
 	}
-- 
1.8.1.rc1.5.g7e0651a