On Fri, June 22, 2012 at 16:23 (+0200), Josef Bacik wrote: > On 06/22/2012 09:38 AM, Jan Schmidt wrote: >> On Fri, June 22, 2012 at 15:30 (+0200), Josef Bacik wrote: >>> l2 shouldn't be locked anymore, if we're in push_leaf_left it's because we >>> cow'ed l2 and are holding a lock on it, so really it has a lock on l2' and the >>> btrfs_next_leaf is trying to get a lock on l2 which it should be free to do. >> >> Each tree block is cowed only once per transaction, right? Lets assume l2 was >> cowed before any of the above threads started, we should end up with a lock on >> l2 even in push_leaf_left, because should_cow_block returns 0. >> > > Except you'd never get to l2 in the case that it had already been cow'ed. Thanks, Thank you :-) That's the missing bit. -Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
