[PATCH] ovl: fix comment about locking order
Amir Goldstein <[email protected]> Tue, 9 Jun 2026 20:46:56 +0200
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-unionfs |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Forgot to update the comment when we changed the locking order.
Fixes: 162d06444070c ("ovl: reorder ovl_want_write() after ovl_inode_lock()")
Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <[email protected]>
---
Christian,
Could this patch get a ride on the vfs-7.2.misc bus
or one of the following vfs.fixes buses?
Otherwise, I shall queue it for some future ovl PR.
Thanks,
Amir.
fs/overlayfs/inode.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/inode.c b/fs/overlayfs/inode.c
index 00c69707bda98..bc71231cad532 100644
--- a/fs/overlayfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/overlayfs/inode.c
@@ -783,8 +783,8 @@ static const struct address_space_operations ovl_aops = {
*
* This chain is valid:
* - inode->i_rwsem (inode_lock[2])
- * - upper_mnt->mnt_sb->s_writers (ovl_want_write[0])
* - OVL_I(inode)->lock (ovl_inode_lock[2])
+ * - upper_mnt->mnt_sb->s_writers (ovl_want_write[0])
* - OVL_I(lowerinode)->lock (ovl_inode_lock[1])
*
* And this chain is valid:
@@ -797,8 +797,8 @@ static const struct address_space_operations ovl_aops = {
* held, because it is in reverse order of the non-nested case using the same
* upper fs:
* - inode->i_rwsem (inode_lock[1])
- * - upper_mnt->mnt_sb->s_writers (ovl_want_write[0])
* - OVL_I(inode)->lock (ovl_inode_lock[1])
+ * - upper_mnt->mnt_sb->s_writers (ovl_want_write[0])
*/
#define OVL_MAX_NESTING FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH
--
2.54.0