diff options
author | Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> | 2015-07-20 00:50:55 +0200 |
---|---|---|
committer | Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> | 2015-08-15 13:52:09 +0200 |
commit | f4b554af9931585174d4913b482eacab75858964 (patch) | |
tree | e01977e85b9568688a28058ebacd82f34be6ae14 /fs/super.c | |
parent | bee9182d955227f01ff3b80c4cb6acca9bb40b11 (diff) | |
download | linux-stable-f4b554af9931585174d4913b482eacab75858964.tar.gz linux-stable-f4b554af9931585174d4913b482eacab75858964.tar.bz2 linux-stable-f4b554af9931585174d4913b482eacab75858964.zip |
fix the broken lockdep logic in __sb_start_write()
1. wait_event(frozen < level) without rwsem_acquire_read() is just
wrong from lockdep perspective. If we are going to deadlock
because the caller is buggy, lockdep can't detect this problem.
2. __sb_start_write() can race with thaw_super() + freeze_super(),
and after "goto retry" the 2nd acquire_freeze_lock() is wrong.
3. The "tell lockdep we are doing trylock" hack doesn't look nice.
I think this is correct, but this logic should be more explicit.
Yes, the recursive read_lock() is fine if we hold the lock on a
higher level. But we do not need to fool lockdep. If we can not
deadlock in this case then try-lock must not fail and we can use
use wait == F throughout this code.
Note: as Dave Chinner explains, the "trylock" hack and the fat comment
can be probably removed. But this needs a separate change and it will
be trivial: just kill __sb_start_write() and rename do_sb_start_write()
back to __sb_start_write().
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'fs/super.c')
-rw-r--r-- | fs/super.c | 73 |
1 files changed, 40 insertions, 33 deletions
diff --git a/fs/super.c b/fs/super.c index b61372354f2b..24a76bcd62a5 100644 --- a/fs/super.c +++ b/fs/super.c @@ -1158,38 +1158,11 @@ void __sb_end_write(struct super_block *sb, int level) } EXPORT_SYMBOL(__sb_end_write); -#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP -/* - * We want lockdep to tell us about possible deadlocks with freezing but - * it's it bit tricky to properly instrument it. Getting a freeze protection - * works as getting a read lock but there are subtle problems. XFS for example - * gets freeze protection on internal level twice in some cases, which is OK - * only because we already hold a freeze protection also on higher level. Due - * to these cases we have to tell lockdep we are doing trylock when we - * already hold a freeze protection for a higher freeze level. - */ -static void acquire_freeze_lock(struct super_block *sb, int level, bool trylock, +static int do_sb_start_write(struct super_block *sb, int level, bool wait, unsigned long ip) { - int i; - - if (!trylock) { - for (i = 0; i < level - 1; i++) - if (lock_is_held(&sb->s_writers.lock_map[i])) { - trylock = true; - break; - } - } - rwsem_acquire_read(&sb->s_writers.lock_map[level-1], 0, trylock, ip); -} -#endif - -/* - * This is an internal function, please use sb_start_{write,pagefault,intwrite} - * instead. - */ -int __sb_start_write(struct super_block *sb, int level, bool wait) -{ + if (wait) + rwsem_acquire_read(&sb->s_writers.lock_map[level-1], 0, 0, ip); retry: if (unlikely(sb->s_writers.frozen >= level)) { if (!wait) @@ -1198,9 +1171,6 @@ retry: sb->s_writers.frozen < level); } -#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP - acquire_freeze_lock(sb, level, !wait, _RET_IP_); -#endif percpu_counter_inc(&sb->s_writers.counter[level-1]); /* * Make sure counter is updated before we check for frozen. @@ -1211,8 +1181,45 @@ retry: __sb_end_write(sb, level); goto retry; } + + if (!wait) + rwsem_acquire_read(&sb->s_writers.lock_map[level-1], 0, 1, ip); return 1; } + +/* + * This is an internal function, please use sb_start_{write,pagefault,intwrite} + * instead. + */ +int __sb_start_write(struct super_block *sb, int level, bool wait) +{ + bool force_trylock = false; + int ret; + +#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP + /* + * We want lockdep to tell us about possible deadlocks with freezing + * but it's it bit tricky to properly instrument it. Getting a freeze + * protection works as getting a read lock but there are subtle + * problems. XFS for example gets freeze protection on internal level + * twice in some cases, which is OK only because we already hold a + * freeze protection also on higher level. Due to these cases we have + * to use wait == F (trylock mode) which must not fail. + */ + if (wait) { + int i; + + for (i = 0; i < level - 1; i++) + if (lock_is_held(&sb->s_writers.lock_map[i])) { + force_trylock = true; + break; + } + } +#endif + ret = do_sb_start_write(sb, level, wait && !force_trylock, _RET_IP_); + WARN_ON(force_trylock & !ret); + return ret; +} EXPORT_SYMBOL(__sb_start_write); /** |