[rtems commit] fs/jffs2: fix comments mentioning i_mutex

[Sebastian Huber]

Module:    rtems
Branch:    master
Commit:    c43e39ed7700dcb8e010723211fe1f29abb906b7
Changeset: http://git.rtems.org/rtems/commit/?id=c43e39ed7700dcb8e010723211fe1f29abb906b7

Author:    hongnanli <hongnan.li at linux.alibaba.com>
Date:      Fri Feb 11 11:19:28 2022 +0800

fs/jffs2: fix comments mentioning i_mutex

inode->i_mutex has been replaced with inode->i_rwsem long ago. Fix
comments still mentioning i_mutex.

Signed-off-by: hongnanli <hongnan.li at linux.alibaba.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard at nod.at>

---

 cpukit/libfs/src/jffs2/src/jffs2_fs_i.h | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/cpukit/libfs/src/jffs2/src/jffs2_fs_i.h b/cpukit/libfs/src/jffs2/src/jffs2_fs_i.h
index 6b6050e9eb..64ff8abc01 100644
--- a/cpukit/libfs/src/jffs2/src/jffs2_fs_i.h
+++ b/cpukit/libfs/src/jffs2/src/jffs2_fs_i.h
@@ -18,11 +18,11 @@
 #include <linux/mutex.h>
 
 struct jffs2_inode_info {
-	/* We need an internal mutex similar to inode->i_mutex.
+	/* We need an internal mutex similar to inode->i_rwsem.
 	   Unfortunately, we can't used the existing one, because
 	   either the GC would deadlock, or we'd have to release it
 	   before letting GC proceed. Or we'd have to put ugliness
-	   into the GC code so it didn't attempt to obtain the i_mutex
+	   into the GC code so it didn't attempt to obtain the i_rwsem
 	   for the inode(s) which are already locked */
 	struct mutex sem;