udf: Fix lockdep warning from udf_symlink()
Lockdep is complaining about UDF: ============================================= [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ] 3.12.0+ #16 Not tainted --------------------------------------------- ln/7386 is trying to acquire lock: (&ei->i_data_sem){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff8142f06d>] udf_get_block+0x8d/0x130 but task is already holding lock: (&ei->i_data_sem){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff81431a8d>] udf_symlink+0x8d/0x690 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 ---- lock(&ei->i_data_sem); lock(&ei->i_data_sem); *** DEADLOCK *** This is because we hold i_data_sem of the symlink inode while calling udf_add_entry() for the directory. I don't think this can ever lead to deadlocks since we never hold i_data_sem for two inodes in any other place. The fix is simple - move unlock of i_data_sem for symlink inode up. We don't need it for anything when linking symlink inode to directory. Reported-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
This commit is contained in:
Родитель
301d4c9a28
Коммит
4ea7772f82
|
@ -1010,6 +1010,7 @@ static int udf_symlink(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
|
|||
else
|
||||
udf_truncate_tail_extent(inode);
|
||||
mark_inode_dirty(inode);
|
||||
up_write(&iinfo->i_data_sem);
|
||||
|
||||
fi = udf_add_entry(dir, dentry, &fibh, &cfi, &err);
|
||||
if (!fi)
|
||||
|
@ -1023,7 +1024,6 @@ static int udf_symlink(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
|
|||
udf_write_fi(dir, &cfi, fi, &fibh, NULL, NULL);
|
||||
if (UDF_I(dir)->i_alloc_type == ICBTAG_FLAG_AD_IN_ICB)
|
||||
mark_inode_dirty(dir);
|
||||
up_write(&iinfo->i_data_sem);
|
||||
if (fibh.sbh != fibh.ebh)
|
||||
brelse(fibh.ebh);
|
||||
brelse(fibh.sbh);
|
||||
|
|
Загрузка…
Ссылка в новой задаче