| Message ID | 20140208221843.GA12866@localhost.localdomain (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/async-thread.c b/fs/btrfs/async-thread.c index c1e0b0c..0b78bf2 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/async-thread.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/async-thread.c @@ -262,18 +262,19 @@ static struct btrfs_work *get_next_work(struct btrfs_worker_thread *worker, struct btrfs_work *work = NULL; struct list_head *cur = NULL; - if (!list_empty(prio_head)) + if (!list_empty(prio_head)) { cur = prio_head->next; + goto out; + } smp_mb(); if (!list_empty(&worker->prio_pending)) goto refill; - if (!list_empty(head)) + if (!list_empty(head)) { cur = head->next; - - if (cur) goto out; + } refill: spin_lock_irq(&worker->lock);
In case we do not refill, we can overwrite cur pointer from prio_head by one from not prioritized head, what looks as something that was not intended. This change make we always take works from prio_head first until it's not empty. Signed-off-by: Stanislaw Gruszka <stf_xl@wp.pl> --- I found this by reading code, not sure if change is correct. Patch is only compile tested. fs/btrfs/async-thread.c | 9 +++++---- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)