All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Srinivasa Ds <srinivasa@in.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, neilb@suse.de,
	nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, bfields@fieldses.org,
	andros@citi.umich.edu
Subject: [PATCH] NFS4  fix for recursive locking problem.
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 19:24:56 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <454755B0.5020103@in.ibm.com> (raw)

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2577 bytes --]

When I was performing some operations on NFS, I got below error on server side.

===========================================================

=============================================
[ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
2.6.19-prep #1
---------------------------------------------
nfsd4/3525 is trying to acquire lock:
 (&inode->i_mutex){--..}, at: [<c0611e5a>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24

but task is already holding lock:
 (&inode->i_mutex){--..}, at: [<c0611e5a>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24

other info that might help us debug this:
2 locks held by nfsd4/3525:
 #0:  (client_mutex){--..}, at: [<c0611e5a>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24
 #1:  (&inode->i_mutex){--..}, at: [<c0611e5a>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24

stack backtrace:
 [<c04051ed>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x58/0x16a
 [<c04057fa>] show_trace+0xd/0x10
 [<c0405913>] dump_stack+0x19/0x1b
 [<c043b6f1>] __lock_acquire+0x778/0x99c
 [<c043be86>] lock_acquire+0x4b/0x6d
 [<c0611ceb>] __mutex_lock_slowpath+0xbc/0x20a
 [<c0611e5a>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24
 [<c047fd7e>] vfs_rmdir+0x76/0xf8
 [<f94b7ce9>] nfsd4_clear_clid_dir+0x2c/0x41 [nfsd]
 [<f94b7de9>] nfsd4_remove_clid_dir+0xb1/0xe8 [nfsd]
 [<f94b307b>] laundromat_main+0x9b/0x1c3 [nfsd]
 [<c04333d6>] run_workqueue+0x7a/0xbb
 [<c0433d0b>] worker_thread+0xd2/0x107
 [<c0436285>] kthread+0xc3/0xf2
 [<c0402005>] kernel_thread_helper+0x5/0xb
===================================================================
Cause for this problem was,2 successive mutex_lock calls on 2 diffrent inodes ,as shown below
======================================================
static int
nfsd4_clear_clid_dir(struct dentry *dir, struct dentry *dentry)
{
        int status;

        /* For now this directory should already be empty, but we empty it of
         * any regular files anyway, just in case the directory was created by
         * a kernel from the future.... */
        nfsd4_list_rec_dir(dentry, nfsd4_remove_clid_file);
        mutex_lock(&dir->d_inode->i_mutex);
        status = vfs_rmdir(dir->d_inode, dentry);
=======================================================
int vfs_rmdir(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry)
{
        int error = may_delete(dir, dentry, 1);

        if (error)
                return error;

        if (!dir->i_op || !dir->i_op->rmdir)
                return -EPERM;

        DQUOT_INIT(dir);

        mutex_lock(&dentry->d_inode->i_mutex);
===========================================================
So I have developed the patch to overcome this problem. Please let me know your comments on this.

Signed-off-by: Srinivasa DS <srinivasa@in.ibm.com>




[-- Attachment #2: nfs4.fix --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 734 bytes --]

 nfs4recover.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Index: linux-2.6.19-rc3/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.19-rc3.orig/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c	2006-10-24 04:32:02.000000000 +0530
+++ linux-2.6.19-rc3/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c	2006-10-31 18:27:30.000000000 +0530
@@ -274,7 +274,7 @@
 	 * any regular files anyway, just in case the directory was created by
 	 * a kernel from the future.... */
 	nfsd4_list_rec_dir(dentry, nfsd4_remove_clid_file);
-	mutex_lock(&dir->d_inode->i_mutex);
+	mutex_lock_nested(&dir->d_inode->i_mutex, I_MUTEX_PARENT);
 	status = vfs_rmdir(dir->d_inode, dentry);
 	mutex_unlock(&dir->d_inode->i_mutex);
 	return status;

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 373 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642

[-- Attachment #4: Type: text/plain, Size: 140 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Srinivasa Ds <srinivasa@in.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, neilb@suse.de,
	nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, bfields@fieldses.org,
	andros@citi.umich.edu
Subject: [PATCH] NFS4  fix for recursive locking problem.
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 19:24:56 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <454755B0.5020103@in.ibm.com> (raw)

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2577 bytes --]

When I was performing some operations on NFS, I got below error on server side.

===========================================================

=============================================
[ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
2.6.19-prep #1
---------------------------------------------
nfsd4/3525 is trying to acquire lock:
 (&inode->i_mutex){--..}, at: [<c0611e5a>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24

but task is already holding lock:
 (&inode->i_mutex){--..}, at: [<c0611e5a>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24

other info that might help us debug this:
2 locks held by nfsd4/3525:
 #0:  (client_mutex){--..}, at: [<c0611e5a>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24
 #1:  (&inode->i_mutex){--..}, at: [<c0611e5a>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24

stack backtrace:
 [<c04051ed>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x58/0x16a
 [<c04057fa>] show_trace+0xd/0x10
 [<c0405913>] dump_stack+0x19/0x1b
 [<c043b6f1>] __lock_acquire+0x778/0x99c
 [<c043be86>] lock_acquire+0x4b/0x6d
 [<c0611ceb>] __mutex_lock_slowpath+0xbc/0x20a
 [<c0611e5a>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24
 [<c047fd7e>] vfs_rmdir+0x76/0xf8
 [<f94b7ce9>] nfsd4_clear_clid_dir+0x2c/0x41 [nfsd]
 [<f94b7de9>] nfsd4_remove_clid_dir+0xb1/0xe8 [nfsd]
 [<f94b307b>] laundromat_main+0x9b/0x1c3 [nfsd]
 [<c04333d6>] run_workqueue+0x7a/0xbb
 [<c0433d0b>] worker_thread+0xd2/0x107
 [<c0436285>] kthread+0xc3/0xf2
 [<c0402005>] kernel_thread_helper+0x5/0xb
===================================================================
Cause for this problem was,2 successive mutex_lock calls on 2 diffrent inodes ,as shown below
======================================================
static int
nfsd4_clear_clid_dir(struct dentry *dir, struct dentry *dentry)
{
        int status;

        /* For now this directory should already be empty, but we empty it of
         * any regular files anyway, just in case the directory was created by
         * a kernel from the future.... */
        nfsd4_list_rec_dir(dentry, nfsd4_remove_clid_file);
        mutex_lock(&dir->d_inode->i_mutex);
        status = vfs_rmdir(dir->d_inode, dentry);
=======================================================
int vfs_rmdir(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry)
{
        int error = may_delete(dir, dentry, 1);

        if (error)
                return error;

        if (!dir->i_op || !dir->i_op->rmdir)
                return -EPERM;

        DQUOT_INIT(dir);

        mutex_lock(&dentry->d_inode->i_mutex);
===========================================================
So I have developed the patch to overcome this problem. Please let me know your comments on this.

Signed-off-by: Srinivasa DS <srinivasa@in.ibm.com>




[-- Attachment #2: nfs4.fix --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 734 bytes --]

 nfs4recover.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Index: linux-2.6.19-rc3/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.19-rc3.orig/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c	2006-10-24 04:32:02.000000000 +0530
+++ linux-2.6.19-rc3/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c	2006-10-31 18:27:30.000000000 +0530
@@ -274,7 +274,7 @@
 	 * any regular files anyway, just in case the directory was created by
 	 * a kernel from the future.... */
 	nfsd4_list_rec_dir(dentry, nfsd4_remove_clid_file);
-	mutex_lock(&dir->d_inode->i_mutex);
+	mutex_lock_nested(&dir->d_inode->i_mutex, I_MUTEX_PARENT);
 	status = vfs_rmdir(dir->d_inode, dentry);
 	mutex_unlock(&dir->d_inode->i_mutex);
 	return status;

             reply	other threads:[~2006-10-31 13:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-10-31 13:54 Srinivasa Ds [this message]
2006-10-31 13:54 ` [PATCH] NFS4 fix for recursive locking problem Srinivasa Ds
2006-11-07  0:26 ` J. Bruce Fields
2006-11-07  0:26   ` J. Bruce Fields

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=454755B0.5020103@in.ibm.com \
    --to=srinivasa@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=andros@citi.umich.edu \
    --cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=nfs@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.