On 08/14/2012 08:59 PM, Marco Stornelli wrote:
> Il 14/08/2012 07:01, [email protected] ha scritto:
>> From: Liu Bo <[email protected]>
>>
>> I found this while testing xfstests 068, the story is
>>
>>      t1                                            t2
>>    sys_sync                                    thaw_super
>>      iterate_supers
>>        down_read(sb->s_umount)                   down_write(sb->s_umount) 
>> --->wait for t1
>>        sync_fs (with wait mode)
>>          start_transaction
>>            sb_start_intwrite --------------------> wait for t2 to set 
>> s_writers.frozen to SB_UNFROZEN
>>
>> In this patch, I add an helper sb_start_intwrite_trylock() and use it before 
>> we
>> start_transaction in sync_fs() with wait mode so that we won't hit the 
>> deadlock.
>>
> 
> IMHO, we should avoid to call the sync operation on a frozen fs. The freeze 
> operation, indeed, already include a sync operation.
> According to man page, no other operation should modify the fs after the 
> freeze. 
> So for me the modification is inside sync_filesystem (and sync_one_sb).

Do you mean that we should add the trylock check in sync_filesystem?

But it seems to be useless because we already run into down_read(sb->s_umount) 
before starting sync_one_sb().

thanks,
liubo

> 
> Marco
> -- 
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to