Re: writeback: bad unlock balance detected in 3.5-rc1

[Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>]

On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 05:51:48PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 05:07:36PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> >> On Fri 08-06-12 10:36:13, Ted Tso wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I can reproduce this fairly easily by using ext4 w/o a journal, running
> >> > under KVM with 1024megs memory, with fsstress (xfstests #13):
> >
> > Good catch, thanks!
> >
> >>   Argh, I wonder how come I didn't hit this. Does attached patch fix the
> >> problem?
> >
> >> diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> >> index 8d2fb8c..41a3ccf 100644
> >> --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
> >> +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> >> @@ -664,6 +664,7 @@ static long writeback_sb_inodes(struct super_block *sb,
> >>                       /* Wait for I_SYNC. This function drops i_lock... */
> >>                       inode_sleep_on_writeback(inode);
> >>                       /* Inode may be gone, start again */
> >> +                     spin_lock(&wb->list_lock);
> >>                       continue;
> >>               }
> >
> > That looks like the fix. So I pushed it to writeback-for-next.
> > Thanks for the quick fixing!
> >
> 
> s/writeback-for-next/writeback-for-linus ?

I use the same branch for next and linus.. Before sending git pull
requests, I add a tag somewhere in the branch and ask Linus to pull
that tag :)

Thanks,
Fengguang