From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Subject: Re: [PATCH] locks: rename file-private locks to file-description locks Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 16:25:20 +0200 Message-ID: <53552A50.9040005@gmail.com> References: <1398087935-14001-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mtk.manpages@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, samba-technical@lists.samba.org, Ganesha NFS List , Carlos O'Donell , libc-alpha , "Stefan (metze) Metzmacher" To: Jeff Layton , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mail-ee0-f54.google.com ([74.125.83.54]:36267 "EHLO mail-ee0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751682AbaDUOZX (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Apr 2014 10:25:23 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1398087935-14001-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 04/21/2014 03:45 PM, Jeff Layton wrote: [...] > - * These cmd values will set locks that conflict with normal POSIX locks, but > - * are "owned" by the opened file, not the process. This means that they are > - * inherited across fork() like BSD (flock) locks, and they are only released > - * automatically when the last reference to the the open file against which > - * they were acquired is put. > + * These cmd values will set locks that conflict with process-associated > + * record locks, but are "owned" by the opened file description, not the > + * process. This means that they are inherited across fork() like BSD (flock) > + * locks, and they are only released automatically when the last reference to > + * the the open file against which they were acquired is put. (Pre-existing) typo: s/the the/the/ -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/