From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-yx1-f65.google.com (mail-yx1-f65.google.com [74.125.224.65]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C90B431AF24 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2025 17:04:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=74.125.224.65 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762967048; cv=none; b=KwB3a0/N8cgek1wbo9hVTloEU/o0iS11FIjVKraij06qR0LQvFswz0SXwgkruDhckuEwJmWKjrK7UBwPiNjoz9tPctbFfjE5Zf8hOJ2NwF4QfEB9QMcUvWkZnRyJ9ar3ZtD3FS4G2UJy6J1zvXrYx2Z/EIsM9cxq6daV5Op1hxk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762967048; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YNUnUW29WGgYvHmssLOQzNGAga3ZwdB49ndEqbB3IG8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=kxb0G4kl0AjVtKbtdSC6ZboWlzHfJwdGV1Cuc6qaBY4jwB1PvvuWi4wFJOhD5aGwn2YgD24DGppN6Ytss93/rOif7ite+gyqN5TfmJ3GmDtU/wP50cDRNKR344SVoo+nsNJiwDuAiFKMMeZbEZ3q2LOttmsONqwyH3ApYU2iMAk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=dhRQwzuO; arc=none smtp.client-ip=74.125.224.65 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="dhRQwzuO" Received: by mail-yx1-f65.google.com with SMTP id 956f58d0204a3-640d790d444so1004617d50.0 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2025 09:04:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1762967044; x=1763571844; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=k1MAVS+duT+CCEX1s12T8DfNLnYBmUE5WD8ayuuzgwQ=; b=dhRQwzuOvkfB/LPoh4kBARUJ4WfAjeS5QZcrjPkQdg86/ijnoDgXFUzaWB5FlXUQHC ogyTj61etAbGvlxxL/7M6IWyp0Mu8C0Eg//DJpWJ82QOYs3+Zq/iaG6+Wb1tHOhDiI1t G29M/xXO2rACzqlHQfmrm2y37zI8R6HaxR63z0iEe6I96QwWpuSvjVCPKbLMwHIVsTEa q/4+F101ELjV4dGm4bMoexVllfRmMqsG3i5VPj1x1YyIUW/v8FTyjyYyfifxR/ObQM2b aqbauqKQz6bJDNdsqYd8azcsZ/uCzcf86vK11MVzzCsLD13PxMyhIZY2XLe1lMay3Uf+ gdtw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1762967044; x=1763571844; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=k1MAVS+duT+CCEX1s12T8DfNLnYBmUE5WD8ayuuzgwQ=; b=tm4HBYJiWb8ZYIsEeAjH+oiNwbHpKRhGUHd1QFls3l5ex0Yxq4AYSK8hHB10RaUU/X m5rgAEy0K/WffYDXAo6+8VmBlpIyOCL86YJU9dEcyL4iCMmhQW+1NkT1w7KjXrAj/nZM 2AjquTdfk3JcdzXvHa8d/3FwHLNOTbssmXgrnlO1bxs6tY/b7EbbHibSPXGMCmAH3Re8 Yuk86G1xcKzL65JR7UQCzhwWy16dD4ETstIYAM6Xdlq+Y6nQbIkxqzb19VVki7vP2A1B n4GOAPkR9LIv6UXaSb0f4IBWUJgScjw/1EWDyfSFukjHOKVavk6VD7DkCoRwpz0gQu4Y wNng== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzytvC/Rh8Mu1MaGWG61ny02eRaQIME3RlSanrKYnt48nepCpMj 2jQXl9YgdwJSR59ZZ+yVTEXs9UMLUN93Z38lMNvoIbPO4UlbWCIjV0hI X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvjZG7AEu5N7Ez8Z/cuD1gEz1jGOeokN4X2j/ieKQE+iI9orH6dv+0gEuQDaIH wOZk0AsZ6s3hjeMJV8NX3C3XdS1tKsIpX0CxkAl5X81lh3JmGonOzTcy8Rh+4uzuJHIQzcgd75E e7L0mE3+1CyOBtrFfSyK3WPf5DVrmGxzbzmqF8RH5uuJKUanC6qClh14+5HkkUYH0LzWUvw5Oeo 9C14+ZyXQ+NFRc96GZEW2kQ2RG2aWMe1Im3PUcZuPxne8xuHzpJ4DaXqN0DXUbLWZbfINO0fKNx b+0KseHFqJ+Q2MxlQSuvcrGfrl2aU7d68GIYA9Qj8iuu3kJqa9miJ2Yk7YsyoDikQ26TvGd3yBR emLkXzN9qz6n813xHojJ50J7KjU7Z5s0LTeH3EPpAWZkklLY3AoXIgKIN62f8RjQ3Zz/O0EjePt YOrf6QQ/hf2ttypttr X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE/+eOAZNdtvR+xXa7y7J0mZGHVXzJ7M2lvoTIc3BQr4guICQkg/QVcLcDNPNVP5eLmyC2Ljg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:690e:781:b0:63f:b605:b7eb with SMTP id 956f58d0204a3-64101b8216cmr2322183d50.67.1762967044517; Wed, 12 Nov 2025 09:04:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2a03:2880:25ff:3::]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 956f58d0204a3-641015c3dfbsm1102152d50.7.2025.11.12.09.04.03 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 12 Nov 2025 09:04:04 -0800 (PST) From: Leo Martins To: David Sterba Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: take delayed_node mutex when releasing item Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 09:03:55 -0800 Message-ID: <20251112170401.506658-1-loemra.dev@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20251112070925.GD13846@twin.jikos.cz> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:09:25 +0100 David Sterba wrote: > On Tue, Nov 11, 2025 at 04:22:57PM -0800, Leo Martins wrote: > > The error path in btrfs_delete_delayed_dir_index does not take > > the delayed_node mutex when releasing delayed item. > > btrfs_release_delayed_item -> __btrfs_remove_delayed_item which > > has lockdep_assert_held(&delayed_node->mutex) > > > > Fix this by taking the mutex when releasing. > > > > Fixes: 933c22a7512c ("btrfs: delayed-inode: Kill the BUG_ON() in btrfs_delete_delayed_dir_index()") > > Signed-off-by: Leo Martins > > --- > > fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c | 2 ++ > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c b/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c > > index e77a597580c5..30dd067e2db3 100644 > > --- a/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c > > +++ b/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c > > @@ -1662,7 +1662,9 @@ int btrfs_delete_delayed_dir_index(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, > > btrfs_err(trans->fs_info, > > "metadata reservation failed for delayed dir item deletion, index: %llu, root: %llu, inode: %llu, error: %d", > > index, btrfs_root_id(node->root), node->inode_id, ret); > > + mutex_lock(&node->mutex); > > btrfs_release_delayed_item(item); > > + mutex_unlock(&node->mutex); > > I don't think it's needed, the item has been just allocated but not yet > added to the rbtree (__btrfs_add_delayed_item() a few lines below). > > In btrfs_release_delayed_item() there's a check if the item is in the > rbtree, if not then nothing is done. Otherwise the lockdep assertion is > checked, and the locking would be needed. Whoops, you're right, good catch.