On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 04:07:31PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 08:27:11AM +0400, Slava Barinov wrote:
> > And there's nothing in dmesg that could help user to understand what
> > happened. I've lost about ten minutes trying to understand what does
> > it want from me.
>Could you please show me what line does 'walk_down_proc+0x2b0/0x2e0 [btrfs]'
> refer to?
It's
6578 if (path->locks[level] && level > 0) {
6579 btrfs_tree_unlock_rw(eb, path->locks[level]);
^^^^
6580 path->locks[level] = 0;
6581 }
6582 return 0;
which calls btrfs_tree_unlock() and hits the
241 void btrfs_tree_unlock(struct extent_buffer *eb)
242 {
243 int blockers = atomic_read(&eb->blocking_writers);
244
245 BUG_ON(blockers > 1);
246
247 btrfs_assert_tree_locked(eb);
->
263 void btrfs_assert_tree_locked(struct extent_buffer *eb)
264 {
265 BUG_ON(!atomic_read(&eb->write_locks));
266 }
david
--
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
