From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Josef Bacik Subject: Re: locking problems: Btrfs: be more selective in the defrag ioctl Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 10:09:20 -0400 Message-ID: <20100322140920.GB2383@localhost.localdomain> References: <20100320113851.GB5331@bicker> <20100322134720.GA2383@localhost.localdomain> <20100322140330.GR21571@bicker> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii To: Dan Carpenter , Josef Bacik , chris.mason@oracle.com, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100322140330.GR21571@bicker> List-ID: On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 05:03:30PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 09:47:21AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 02:38:51PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > Hi Chris, > > > > > > There is a locking problem in > > > 940100a4a7b78 "Btrfs: be more selective in the defrag ioctl" > > > > > > There are two places where we break out of the while loop under the > > > lock. > > > > > > fs/btrfs/ioctl.c +708 btrfs_defrag_file(159) error: double lock 'mutex:&inode->i_mutex' > > > 600 mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex); > > > 601 if (range->flags & BTRFS_DEFRAG_RANGE_COMPRESS) > > > 602 BTRFS_I(inode)->force_compress = 1; > > > 603 > > > 604 ret = btrfs_check_data_free_space(root, inode, PAGE_CACHE_SIZE); > > > 605 if (ret) { > > > 606 ret = -ENOSPC; > > > 607 break; > > > > > > Here. > > > > > > 608 } > > > 609 > > > 610 ret = btrfs_reserve_metadata_for_delalloc(root, inode, 1); > > > 611 if (ret) { > > > 612 btrfs_free_reserved_data_space(root, inode, > > > 613 PAGE_CACHE_SIZE); > > > 614 ret = -ENOSPC; > > > 615 break; > > > > > > And here. > > > > > > 616 } > > > > > > Maybe we should have "goto err_reservations;" instead of break? I > > > don't know the code well enough to say. > > > > No, everything is accounted for correctly. If the metadata reservation fails, > > we free the data space reservation and break. If the data space reservation > > fails, we're good to go and can just exit. Thanks, > > > > What about the lock on line 606? > > > > 600 mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex); > > If we break on line 615 or 607 that means that we return with the lock > held, or if (range->flags & BTRFS_DEFRAG_RANGE_COMPRESS) is true then we > dead lock. > Ahh yeah you are right, should probably just put a mutex_unlock before the break in both cases. Thanks, Josef