Re: [vfs:fsfreeze] umount BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context

[Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>]

On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 05:13:26PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 09:58:15AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 04:38:39PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > > Hi Jan,
> > > 
> > > Here is another warning for the fs freeze series.
> > > 
> > > tree:   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/viro/vfs.git fsfreeze
> > > head:   7aff72a61f45337d83ab2b7fb16d7b542db16ad8
> > > commit: bc875c078f72993e6c44925cdedef5a304ca7429 [37/51] fs: Improve filesystem freezing handling
> > > 
> > > The warning shows up reliably since commit bc875c0. The 2nd commit
> > > 51205f9 triggers the same warning as the previous email.
> > 
> > That one is fixed in the end of #fsfreeze (for testing purposes only) and then the right
> > way in #for-next (by making percpu_list_lock a  spinlock).
> 
> Ah sorry. It seems that you quickly pushed the fix
> 
>         commit c91dc212879946b8e542773394cb56e6e3c6e1ae
>         CommitDate: Tue Jul 31 01:57:53 2012 +0400
> 
>             [ewww][testing-only] deal with b0rken use of percpu_counter_destroy() under spinlock
> 
> while I'm still testing the slightly old head:
> 
>         commit 7aff72a61f45337d83ab2b7fb16d7b542db16ad8
>         CommitDate: Tue Jul 31 01:21:32 2012 +0400
> 
>             Documentation: Correct s_umount state for freeze_fs/unfreeze_fs

..and that's an easy to detect situation. I just told the test script
to double check latest HEAD before sending out the report :)

Thanks,
Fengguang