From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locks: pass correct "before" pointer to
 locks_unlink_lock in generic_add_lease
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 04:48:18 -0700
Message-ID: <20140823114818.GA24896@infradead.org>
References: <1408790179-7809-1-git-send-email-jlayton@primarydata.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, bfields@fieldses.org
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:45855 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751683AbaHWLsT (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 23 Aug 2014 07:48:19 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1408790179-7809-1-git-send-email-jlayton@primarydata.com>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 06:36:19AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> The argument to locks_unlink_lock can't be just any pointer to a
> pointer. It must be a pointer to the fl_next field in the previous
> lock in the list.

Looks good,

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

This might explain some memory corruption I saw in the lease code while
trying out a new creative (ab-)user of the lease code..