locks: remove i_have_this_lease check from __break_lease

I think that the intent of this code was to ensure that a process won't
deadlock if it has one fd open with a lease on it and then breaks that
lease by opening another fd. In that case it'll treat the __break_lease
call as if it were non-blocking.

This seems wrong -- the process could (for instance) be multithreaded
and managing different fds via different threads. I also don't see any
mention of this limitation in the (somewhat sketchy) documentation.

Remove the check and the non-blocking behavior when i_have_this_lease
is true.

Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 4 deletions

diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index c0f789dfa655..4e8cf5da2868 100644
--- a/fs/locks.c
+++ b/fs/locks.c
@@ -1370,7 +1370,6 @@ int __break_lease(struct inode *inode, unsigned int mode, unsigned int type)
         struct file_lock *new_fl, *flock;
         struct file_lock *fl;
         unsigned long break_time;
-        int i_have_this_lease = 0;
         bool lease_conflict = false;
         int want_write = (mode & O_ACCMODE) != O_RDONLY;
         LIST_HEAD(dispose);
@@ -1391,8 +1390,7 @@ int __break_lease(struct inode *inode, unsigned int mode, unsigned int type)
         for (fl = flock; fl && IS_LEASE(fl); fl = fl->fl_next) {
                 if (leases_conflict(fl, new_fl)) {
                         lease_conflict = true;
-                        if (fl->fl_owner == current->files)
-                                i_have_this_lease = 1;
+                        break;
                 }
         }
         if (!lease_conflict)
@@ -1422,7 +1420,7 @@ int __break_lease(struct inode *inode, unsigned int mode, unsigned int type)
                 fl->fl_lmops->lm_break(fl);
         }
 
-        if (i_have_this_lease || (mode & O_NONBLOCK)) {
+        if (mode & O_NONBLOCK) {
                 trace_break_lease_noblock(inode, new_fl);
                 error = -EWOULDBLOCK;
                 goto out;