tree 7d1bbcf898660e9f98822ef0d4ce84a5a105b50c
parent 997def25e4b9cee3b01609e18a52f926bca8bd2b
author Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com> 1380497823 +1000
committer Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com> 1380581305 -0500

xfs: lockdep needs to know about 3 dquot-deep nesting

Michael Semon reported that xfs/299 generated this lockdep warning:

=============================================
[ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
3.12.0-rc2+ #2 Not tainted
---------------------------------------------
touch/21072 is trying to acquire lock:
 (&xfs_dquot_other_class){+.+...}, at: [<c12902fb>] xfs_trans_dqlockedjoin+0x57/0x64

but task is already holding lock:
 (&xfs_dquot_other_class){+.+...}, at: [<c12902fb>] xfs_trans_dqlockedjoin+0x57/0x64

other info that might help us debug this:
 Possible unsafe locking scenario:

       CPU0
       ----
  lock(&xfs_dquot_other_class);
  lock(&xfs_dquot_other_class);

 *** DEADLOCK ***

 May be due to missing lock nesting notation

7 locks held by touch/21072:
 #0:  (sb_writers#10){++++.+}, at: [<c11185b6>] mnt_want_write+0x1e/0x3e
 #1:  (&type->i_mutex_dir_key#4){+.+.+.}, at: [<c11078ee>] do_last+0x245/0xe40
 #2:  (sb_internal#2){++++.+}, at: [<c122c9e0>] xfs_trans_alloc+0x1f/0x35
 #3:  (&(&ip->i_lock)->mr_lock/1){+.+...}, at: [<c126cd1b>] xfs_ilock+0x100/0x1f1
 #4:  (&(&ip->i_lock)->mr_lock){++++-.}, at: [<c126cf52>] xfs_ilock_nowait+0x105/0x22f
 #5:  (&dqp->q_qlock){+.+...}, at: [<c12902fb>] xfs_trans_dqlockedjoin+0x57/0x64
 #6:  (&xfs_dquot_other_class){+.+...}, at: [<c12902fb>] xfs_trans_dqlockedjoin+0x57/0x64

The lockdep annotation for dquot lock nesting only understands
locking for user and "other" dquots, not user, group and quota
dquots. Fix the annotations to match the locking heirarchy we now
have.

Reported-by: Michael L. Semon <mlsemon35@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>