Commits
Jeff Mahoney committed ed55b6ac077
btrfs: fix lockdep warning with reclaim lock inversion
When encountering memory pressure, testers have run into the following
lockdep warning. It was caused by __link_block_group calling kobject_add
with the groups_sem held. kobject_add calls kvasprintf with GFP_KERNEL,
which gets us into reclaim context. The kobject doesn't actually need
to be added under the lock -- it just needs to ensure that it's only
added for the first block group to be linked.
=========================================================
[ INFO: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected ]
3.14.0-rc8-default #1 Not tainted
---------------------------------------------------------
kswapd0/169 just changed the state of lock:
(&delayed_node->mutex){+.+.-.}, at: [<ffffffffa018baea>] __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x3a/0x200 [btrfs]
but this lock took another, RECLAIM_FS-unsafe lock in the past:
(&found->groups_sem){+++++.}
and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them.
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(&found->groups_sem);
local_irq_disable();
lock(&delayed_node->mutex);
lock(&found->groups_sem);
<Interrupt>
lock(&delayed_node->mutex);
*** DEADLOCK ***
2 locks held by kswapd0/169:
#0: (shrinker_rwsem){++++..}, at: [<ffffffff81159e8a>] shrink_slab+0x3a/0x160
#1: (&type->s_umount_key#27){++++..}, at: [<ffffffff811bac6f>] grab_super_passive+0x3f/0x90
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>