lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
Subject[61/90] ext4: fix possible recursive locking warning in EXT4_IOC_MOVE_EXT
2.6.31-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us know.

------------------
(cherry picked from commit 49bd22bc4d603a2a4fc2a6a60e156cbea52eb494)

If CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING is enabled, the double_down_write_data_sem()
will trigger a false-positive warning of a recursive lock. Since we
take i_data_sem for the two inodes ordered by their inode numbers,
this isn't a problem. Use of down_write_nested() will notify the lock
dependency checker machinery that there is no problem here.

This problem was reported by Brian Rogers:

http://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4&m=125115356928011&w=1

Reported-by: Brian Rogers <brian@xyzw.org>
Signed-off-by: Akira Fujita <a-fujita@rs.jp.nec.com>
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
---
fs/ext4/move_extent.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/fs/ext4/move_extent.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/move_extent.c
@@ -189,7 +189,7 @@ double_down_write_data_sem(struct inode
}

down_write(&EXT4_I(first)->i_data_sem);
- down_write(&EXT4_I(second)->i_data_sem);
+ down_write_nested(&EXT4_I(second)->i_data_sem, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
}

/**



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-11 05:43    [W:0.131 / U:13.604 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site