On 06/18/2014 11:21 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 06/18/2014 10:11 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
>> On 06/18/2014 10:03 PM, Marc Dionne wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 8:41 PM, Marc
>>> Dionne<marc.c.dionne@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 8:08 PM, Waiman Long<waiman.long@xxxxxx>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 06/18/2014 08:03 PM, Marc Dionne wrote:
>>> And for an additional data point, just removing those
>>> CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC ifdefs looks like it's sufficient to prevent
>>> the symptoms when lockdep is not enabled.
>> Ok, somehow we've added a lock inversion here that wasn't here before.
>> Thanks for confirming, I'll nail it down.
>>
>> -chris
>>
>
> I am pretty sure that the hangup is caused by the following kind of code
> fragment in the locking.c file:
>
> if (eb->lock_nested) {
> read_lock(&eb->lock);
> if (eb->lock_nested && current->pid == eb->lock_owner) {
>
> Is it possible to do the check without taking the read_lock?
I think you're right, we haven't added any new recursive takers of the
lock. The path where we are deadlocking has an extent buffer that isn't
in the path yet locked. I think we're taking the read lock while that
one is write locked.
Reworking the nesting a big here.
-chris
--
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
