| Message ID | 20171108222951.37763-1-aweits@rit.edu (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Thanks! Applied.--b. On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 05:29:51PM -0500, Andrew Elble wrote: > The use of the st_mutex has been confusing the validator. Use the > proper nested notation so as to not produce warnings. > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Elble <aweits@rit.edu> > --- > v2: added mutex_lock_nested to init_lock_stateid() for consistency > v3: add constants > > fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 11 ++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c > index 0d98d73bd84e..5740ad8075c3 100644 > --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c > +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c > @@ -87,6 +87,11 @@ > */ > static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(state_lock); > > +enum nfsd4_st_mutex_lock_subclass { > + OPEN_STATEID_MUTEX = 0, > + LOCK_STATEID_MUTEX = 1, > +}; > + > /* > * A waitqueue for all in-progress 4.0 CLOSE operations that are waiting for > * the refcount on the open stateid to drop. > @@ -3548,7 +3553,7 @@ static void nfs4_free_openowner(struct nfs4_stateowner *so) > { > __be32 ret; > > - mutex_lock(&stp->st_mutex); > + mutex_lock_nested(&stp->st_mutex, LOCK_STATEID_MUTEX); > ret = nfsd4_verify_open_stid(&stp->st_stid); > if (ret != nfs_ok) > mutex_unlock(&stp->st_mutex); > @@ -3612,7 +3617,7 @@ static void nfs4_free_openowner(struct nfs4_stateowner *so) > stp = open->op_stp; > /* We are moving these outside of the spinlocks to avoid the warnings */ > mutex_init(&stp->st_mutex); > - mutex_lock(&stp->st_mutex); > + mutex_lock_nested(&stp->st_mutex, OPEN_STATEID_MUTEX); > > retry: > spin_lock(&oo->oo_owner.so_client->cl_lock); > @@ -5692,7 +5697,7 @@ static void nfs4_free_lockowner(struct nfs4_stateowner *sop) > struct nfs4_ol_stateid *retstp; > > mutex_init(&stp->st_mutex); > - mutex_lock(&stp->st_mutex); > + mutex_lock_nested(&stp->st_mutex, OPEN_STATEID_MUTEX); > retry: > spin_lock(&clp->cl_lock); > spin_lock(&fp->fi_lock); > -- > 1.8.3.1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c index 0d98d73bd84e..5740ad8075c3 100644 --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c @@ -87,6 +87,11 @@ */ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(state_lock); +enum nfsd4_st_mutex_lock_subclass { + OPEN_STATEID_MUTEX = 0, + LOCK_STATEID_MUTEX = 1, +}; + /* * A waitqueue for all in-progress 4.0 CLOSE operations that are waiting for * the refcount on the open stateid to drop. @@ -3548,7 +3553,7 @@ static void nfs4_free_openowner(struct nfs4_stateowner *so) { __be32 ret; - mutex_lock(&stp->st_mutex); + mutex_lock_nested(&stp->st_mutex, LOCK_STATEID_MUTEX); ret = nfsd4_verify_open_stid(&stp->st_stid); if (ret != nfs_ok) mutex_unlock(&stp->st_mutex); @@ -3612,7 +3617,7 @@ static void nfs4_free_openowner(struct nfs4_stateowner *so) stp = open->op_stp; /* We are moving these outside of the spinlocks to avoid the warnings */ mutex_init(&stp->st_mutex); - mutex_lock(&stp->st_mutex); + mutex_lock_nested(&stp->st_mutex, OPEN_STATEID_MUTEX); retry: spin_lock(&oo->oo_owner.so_client->cl_lock); @@ -5692,7 +5697,7 @@ static void nfs4_free_lockowner(struct nfs4_stateowner *sop) struct nfs4_ol_stateid *retstp; mutex_init(&stp->st_mutex); - mutex_lock(&stp->st_mutex); + mutex_lock_nested(&stp->st_mutex, OPEN_STATEID_MUTEX); retry: spin_lock(&clp->cl_lock); spin_lock(&fp->fi_lock);
The use of the st_mutex has been confusing the validator. Use the proper nested notation so as to not produce warnings. Signed-off-by: Andrew Elble <aweits@rit.edu> --- v2: added mutex_lock_nested to init_lock_stateid() for consistency v3: add constants fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 11 ++++++++--- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)