Re: [patch 1/2] Btrfs: double unlock bug in error handling

[David Sterba <dave@xxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 01:29:46PM +0200, Jan Schmidt wrote:
> I think the correct way to fix this is:
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> index a844204..9af261a 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> @@ -2450,7 +2450,6 @@ again:
> 
>                 ret = run_clustered_refs(trans, root, &cluster);
>                 if (ret < 0) {
> -                       spin_unlock(&delayed_refs->lock);
>                         btrfs_abort_transaction(trans, root, ret);
>                         return ret;
>                 }

That's another way to fix it, but I'd rather see the lock/unlock
balanced within a function, and in this case the extra lock does not
hurt as it's a rare codepath.


david
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html