PERFORCE change 112535 for review

[John Baldwin]

On Saturday 06 January 2007 09:40, Divacky Roman wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 12:32:27PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Friday 05 January 2007 03:02, Roman Divacky wrote:
> > > http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=112535
> > > 
> > > Change 112535 by rdivacky at rdivacky_witten on 2007/01/05 08:01:24
> > > 
> > > 	No need to lock prison in a case of linux_use26 becuase the int
> > > 	setting is atomic and process cannot leave jail.
> > > 	
> > > 	Submitted by: kib
> > > 	Reviewed by: jhb
> > > 
> > > Affected files ...
> > > 
> > > .. //depot/projects/linuxolator/src/sys/compat/linux/linux_mib.c#6 edit
> > > 
> > > Differences ...
> > > 
> > > ==== //depot/projects/linuxolator/src/sys/compat/linux/linux_mib.c#6 
> > (text+ko) ====
> > > 
> > > @@ -237,12 +237,10 @@
> > >  
> > >  	pr = td->td_ucred->cr_prison;
> > >  	if (pr != NULL) {
> > > -		mtx_lock(&pr->pr_mtx);
> > >  		if (pr->pr_linux != NULL) {
> > >  			lpr = (struct linux_prison *)pr->pr_linux;
> > >  			use26 = lpr->pr_use_linux26;
> > >  		}
> > > -		mtx_unlock(&pr->pr_mtx);
> > >  	} else
> > >  		use26 = linux_use_linux26;
> > >  	
> > > 
> > 
> > Hmm, what is use26 set to if pr != NULL but pr->pr_linux == NULL?
> 
> to the default value of 0

Shouldn't it be set to linux_use_26 in that case?

-- 
John Baldwin