[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH] ocfs2: Plugs race between the dc thread and an unlock ast message

[Sunil Mushran <sunil.mushran@oracle.com>]

Wengang Wang wrote:
> By "unlock ast message", do you meant
> ocfs2_locking_ast()->ocfs2_generic_handle_downconvert_action()?
>
> If yes, 
> if l_blocking did not changed before ocfs2_generic_handle_downconvert_action(),
> when l_level is set with a lower value, l_blocking must change.
> So why we need to check l_level?

I meant ocfs2_unlock_ast. Specifically cancel convert. That is one case
that does not change l_blocking directly.

However, that does not change the l_level too. So I am unsure what sequence
of asts and basts (multiple ofcourse) can lead to this situation.

But the patch looks reasonable even if I cannot state the precise scenario
that leads to it.

David is rerunning the test. We'll know the results by tomorrow.