From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Layton Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 07:09:00 -0400 Subject: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v2 06/14] locks: don't walk inode->i_flock list in locks_show In-Reply-To: <1370948948-31784-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> References: <1370948948-31784-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1370948948-31784-7-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> List-Id: To: cluster-devel.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit When we convert over to using the i_lock to protect the i_flock list, that will introduce a potential lock inversion problem in locks_show. When we want to walk the i_flock list, we'll need to take the i_lock. Rather than do that, just walk the global blocked_locks list and print out any that are blocked on the given lock. Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton --- fs/locks.c | 6 ++++-- 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c index e451d18..3fd27f0 100644 --- a/fs/locks.c +++ b/fs/locks.c @@ -2249,8 +2249,10 @@ static int locks_show(struct seq_file *f, void *v) lock_get_status(f, fl, *((loff_t *)f->private), ""); - list_for_each_entry(bfl, &fl->fl_block, fl_block) - lock_get_status(f, bfl, *((loff_t *)f->private), " ->"); + list_for_each_entry(bfl, &blocked_list, fl_link) { + if (bfl->fl_next == fl) + lock_get_status(f, bfl, *((loff_t *)f->private), " ->"); + } return 0; } -- 1.7.1