3.2.50-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------ From: Josef Bacik <[email protected]> commit fec386ac1428f9c0e672df952cbca5cebd4e4e2f upstream. We aren't setting path->locks[level] when we resume a snapshot deletion which means we won't unlock the buffer when we free the path. This causes deadlocks if we happen to re-allocate the block before we've evicted the extent buffer from cache. Thanks, Reported-by: Alex Lyakas <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <[email protected]> --- fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) --- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c @@ -6614,6 +6614,7 @@ void btrfs_drop_snapshot(struct btrfs_ro while (1) { btrfs_tree_lock(path->nodes[level]); btrfs_set_lock_blocking(path->nodes[level]); + path->locks[level] = BTRFS_WRITE_LOCK_BLOCKING; ret = btrfs_lookup_extent_info(trans, root, path->nodes[level]->start, @@ -6627,6 +6628,7 @@ void btrfs_drop_snapshot(struct btrfs_ro break; btrfs_tree_unlock(path->nodes[level]); + path->locks[level] = 0; WARN_ON(wc->refs[level] != 1); level--; } -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
