xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80

To: linux-kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock()
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 10:40:54 -0600
In-reply-to: <20070108110323.GA3803@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20070104001420.GA32440@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070107213734.GS44411608@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070108110323.GA3803@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061107)
Sami Farin wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 08:37:34 +1100, David Chinner wrote:
> ...
>>> fstab was there just fine after -u.
>> Oh, that still hasn't been fixed?
> 
> Looked like it =)

Hm, it was proposed upstream a while ago:

http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/9/27/137

I guess it got lost?

-Eric

>> Generic bug, not XFS - the global
>> semaphore->mutex cleanup converted the bd_mount_sem to a mutex, and
>> mutexes complain loudly when a the process unlocking the mutex is
>> not the process that locked it.
>>
>> Basically, the generic code is broken - the bd_mount_mutex needs to
>> be reverted back to a semaphore because it is locked and unlocked
>> by different processes. The following patch does this....
>>
>> BTW, Sami, can you cc xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx on XFS bug reports in future;
>> you'll get more XFS savvy eyes there.....
> 
> Forgot to.
> 
> Thanks for patch.  It fixed the issue, no more warnings.
> 
> BTW. the fix is not in 2.6.git, either.
> 


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>