r3008: when checking for the existance of a lock we are only doing a single

tdb call, so there is no need to get the chainlock. This reduces the
number of tdb locking calls made on file IO
(This used to be commit 78e904c27b31d7123b521c446247d6ff558c84cc)

diff --git a/source3/locking/brlock.c b/source3/locking/brlock.c
index 990a6a25d2fba201bc09e296662bb9c6cfbcbe4e..4c34bd7dfd9cc1517d11047bf2f010b67b091d1b 100644 (file)
--- a/source3/locking/brlock.c
+++ b/source3/locking/brlock.c
@@ -563,7 +563,6 @@ BOOL brl_locktest(SMB_DEV_T dev, SMB_INO_T ino, int fnum,
 
        dbuf.dptr = NULL;
 
-       tdb_chainlock(tdb, kbuf);
        dbuf = tdb_fetch(tdb, kbuf);
 
        lock.context.smbpid = smbpid;
@@ -594,12 +593,10 @@ BOOL brl_locktest(SMB_DEV_T dev, SMB_INO_T ino, int fnum,
 
        /* no conflicts - we could have added it */
        SAFE_FREE(dbuf.dptr);
-       tdb_chainunlock(tdb, kbuf);
        return True;
 
  fail:
        SAFE_FREE(dbuf.dptr);
-       tdb_chainunlock(tdb, kbuf);
        return False;
 }