From: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 18:08:28 +0000 (+0200)
Subject: btrfs: remove stale comments about fs_mutex
X-Git-Tag: v4.17-rc1~137^2~4
X-Git-Url: https://asedeno.scripts.mit.edu/gitweb/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=e7ab0af6c30f763e41a1206318d4756d270e93a0;p=linux.git

btrfs: remove stale comments about fs_mutex

The fs_mutex has been killed in 2008, a213501153fd66e2 ("Btrfs: Replace
the big fs_mutex with a collection of other locks"), still remembered in
some comments.

We don't have any extra needs for locking in the ACL handlers.

Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
---

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/acl.c b/fs/btrfs/acl.c
index f8a1bdf06b2a..0066d95b133f 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/acl.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/acl.c
@@ -65,9 +65,6 @@ struct posix_acl *btrfs_get_acl(struct inode *inode, int type)
 	return acl;
 }
 
-/*
- * Needs to be called with fs_mutex held
- */
 static int __btrfs_set_acl(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
 			 struct inode *inode, struct posix_acl *acl, int type)
 {
@@ -127,11 +124,6 @@ int btrfs_set_acl(struct inode *inode, struct posix_acl *acl, int type)
 	return ret;
 }
 
-/*
- * btrfs_init_acl is already generally called under fs_mutex, so the locking
- * stuff has been fixed to work with that.  If the locking stuff changes, we
- * need to re-evaluate the acl locking stuff.
- */
 int btrfs_init_acl(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
 		   struct inode *inode, struct inode *dir)
 {