On 10.10.2017 13:48, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
> Commit a53f4f8e9c8eb ("btrfs: Don't call btrfs_start_transaction() on
> frozen fs to avoid deadlock.") started using internal calls and we
> replace them with more suitable ones.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rakesh Pandit <rak...@tuxera.com>
> ---
> fs/btrfs/super.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/super.c b/fs/btrfs/super.c
> index 35a128a..99c21ae 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/super.c
> @@ -1205,8 +1205,8 @@ int btrfs_sync_fs(struct super_block *sb, int wait)
> * happens. The pending operations are delayed to the
> * next commit after thawing.
> */
> - if (__sb_start_write(sb, SB_FREEZE_WRITE, false))
> - __sb_end_write(sb, SB_FREEZE_WRITE);
> + if (sb_start_write_trylock(sb))
> + sb_end_write(sb)
> else
> return 0;
On second thought, what's to prevent the filesystem to be frozen if
sb_start_write/sb_end_write code executes? Or even after we are in the
middle of btrfs_start_transaction?
> trans = btrfs_start_transaction(root, 0);
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
