diff options
| author | Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> | 2012-09-05 08:08:30 -0600 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com> | 2012-10-01 15:19:19 -0400 |
| commit | 6df7881a84013f91405e5e113a4c322dd1804ba6 (patch) | |
| tree | 9af9fc0b30c4062b465744a9a14ff92b76011a4c | |
| parent | 425d17a290c0c63785ec65db154a95c6337aeefa (diff) | |
Btrfs: move the sb_end_intwrite until after the throttle logic
Sage reported the following lockdep backtrace
=====================================
[ BUG: bad unlock balance detected! ]
3.6.0-rc2-ceph-00171-gc7ed62d #1 Not tainted
-------------------------------------
btrfs-cleaner/7607 is trying to release lock (sb_internal) at:
[<ffffffffa00422ae>] btrfs_commit_transaction+0xa6e/0xb20 [btrfs]
but there are no more locks to release!
other info that might help us debug this:
1 lock held by btrfs-cleaner/7607:
#0: (&fs_info->cleaner_mutex){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa003b405>] cleaner_kthread+0x95/0x120 [btrfs]
stack backtrace:
Pid: 7607, comm: btrfs-cleaner Not tainted 3.6.0-rc2-ceph-00171-gc7ed62d #1
Call Trace:
[<ffffffffa00422ae>] ? btrfs_commit_transaction+0xa6e/0xb20 [btrfs]
[<ffffffff810afa9e>] print_unlock_inbalance_bug+0xfe/0x110
[<ffffffff810b289e>] lock_release_non_nested+0x1ee/0x310
[<ffffffff81172f9b>] ? kmem_cache_free+0x7b/0x160
[<ffffffffa004106c>] ? put_transaction+0x8c/0x130 [btrfs]
[<ffffffffa00422ae>] ? btrfs_commit_transaction+0xa6e/0xb20 [btrfs]
[<ffffffff810b2a95>] lock_release+0xd5/0x220
[<ffffffff81173071>] ? kmem_cache_free+0x151/0x160
[<ffffffff8117d9ed>] __sb_end_write+0x7d/0x90
[<ffffffffa00422ae>] btrfs_commit_transaction+0xa6e/0xb20 [btrfs]
[<ffffffff81079850>] ? __init_waitqueue_head+0x60/0x60
[<ffffffff81634c6b>] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x2b/0x40
[<ffffffffa0042758>] __btrfs_end_transaction+0x368/0x3c0 [btrfs]
[<ffffffffa0042808>] btrfs_end_transaction_throttle+0x18/0x20 [btrfs]
[<ffffffffa00318f0>] btrfs_drop_snapshot+0x410/0x600 [btrfs]
[<ffffffff8132babd>] ? do_raw_spin_unlock+0x5d/0xb0
[<ffffffffa00430ef>] btrfs_clean_old_snapshots+0xaf/0x150 [btrfs]
[<ffffffffa003b405>] ? cleaner_kthread+0x95/0x120 [btrfs]
[<ffffffffa003b419>] cleaner_kthread+0xa9/0x120 [btrfs]
[<ffffffffa003b370>] ? btrfs_destroy_delayed_refs.isra.102+0x220/0x220 [btrfs]
[<ffffffff810791ee>] kthread+0xae/0xc0
[<ffffffff810b379d>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xd/0x10
[<ffffffff8163e744>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
[<ffffffff81635430>] ? retint_restore_args+0x13/0x13
[<ffffffff81079140>] ? flush_kthread_work+0x1a0/0x1a0
[<ffffffff8163e740>] ? gs_change+0x13/0x13
This is because the throttle stuff can commit the transaction, which expects to
be the one stopping the intwrite stuff, but we've already done it in the
__btrfs_end_transaction. Moving the sb_end_intewrite after this logic makes the
lockdep go away. Thanks,
Tested-by: Sage Weil <sage@inktank.com>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
| -rw-r--r-- | fs/btrfs/transaction.c | 4 |
1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/transaction.c b/fs/btrfs/transaction.c index f8ae448ebec..0629edf9910 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/transaction.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/transaction.c @@ -564,8 +564,6 @@ static int __btrfs_end_transaction(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, btrfs_trans_release_metadata(trans, root); trans->block_rsv = NULL; - sb_end_intwrite(root->fs_info->sb); - if (lock && !atomic_read(&root->fs_info->open_ioctl_trans) && should_end_transaction(trans, root)) { trans->transaction->blocked = 1; @@ -586,6 +584,8 @@ static int __btrfs_end_transaction(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, } } + sb_end_intwrite(root->fs_info->sb); + WARN_ON(cur_trans != info->running_transaction); WARN_ON(atomic_read(&cur_trans->num_writers) < 1); atomic_dec(&cur_trans->num_writers); |