LockingX ignored pidhigh.

[Steve French]

Jeremy Allison wrote:

>Hi Steve,
>
>Just wanted to let you know I did a quick test
>with lockingX where I added a lock with smbpid 1,
>and unlocked it again with smbpid 1, pidhigh 0xaa -
>it still unlocked (if the W2K3 server paid attention
>to pidhigh on lock/unlock contexts it should have
>failed that from us). This means that smbpid really
>is a 16-bit field as far as lockingX requests go
>and pidhigh isn't used (damn - it was a nice idea :-).
>
>Jeremy.
>  
>
Another interesting question is whether two pids with the same pid low 
(e.g. pid 64K+1 and pid 1) have the same locking context (which seems 
likely for the case of Windows).