From 47cd57b687d1320d4561d74692c047202bede433 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Erez_Zadok Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 02:02:42 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] Unionfs: improved comment above unionfs_follow_link Signed-off-by: Erez Zadok --- fs/unionfs/inode.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/unionfs/inode.c b/fs/unionfs/inode.c index 384800ca2fd..b2c021445e0 100644 --- a/fs/unionfs/inode.c +++ b/fs/unionfs/inode.c @@ -908,9 +908,9 @@ out: * unionfs_readlink *does* lock our dentry and revalidate the dentry. * Therefore, we do not have to lock our dentry here, to prevent a deadlock; * nor do we need to revalidate it either. It is safe to not lock our - * dentry here because unionfs_follow_link does not do anything (prior to - * calling ->readlink) which could become inconsistent due to branch - * management. + * dentry here, nor revalidate it, because unionfs_follow_link does not do + * anything (prior to calling ->readlink) which could become inconsistent + * due to branch management. */ static void *unionfs_follow_link(struct dentry *dentry, struct nameidata *nd) { -- 2.43.0