[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 01/11] xfs: avoid nesting transactions in xfs_qm_scall_setqli

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] xfs: avoid nesting transactions in xfs_qm_scall_setqlim()
From: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 13:35:44 -0500
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1369123330-9579-2-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1369123330-9579-1-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1369123330-9579-2-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 06:02:00PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Lockdep reports:
> =============================================
> [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> 3.9.0+ #3 Not tainted
> ---------------------------------------------
> setquota/28368 is trying to acquire lock:
>  (sb_internal){++++.?}, at: [<c11e8846>] xfs_trans_alloc+0x26/0x50
> but task is already holding lock:
>  (sb_internal){++++.?}, at: [<c11e8846>] xfs_trans_alloc+0x26/0x50
> from xfs_qm_scall_setqlim()->xfs_dqread() when a dquot needs to be
> allocated.
> xfs_qm_scall_setqlim() is starting a transaction and then not
> passing it into xfs_qm_dqet() and so it starts it's own transaction
> when allocating the dquot.  Splat!
> Fix this by not allocating the dquot in xfs_qm_scall_setqlim()
> inside the setqlim transaction. This requires getting the dquot
> first (and allocating it if necessary) then dropping and relocking
> the dquot before joining it to the setqlim transaction.
> Reported-by: Michael L. Semon <mlsemon35@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>

Looks good.

Reviewed-by: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>

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