---

yaml
---
r: 173174
b: refs/heads/master
c: c72e057
h: refs/heads/master
v: v3

[refs]

@@ -1,2 +1,2 @@
 ---
-refs/heads/master: 2ac626955ed62ee8596f00581f959cc86e6198d1
+refs/heads/master: c72e05756b900b3be24cd73a16de52bab80984c0

trunk/fs/reiserfs/journal.c

@@ -537,40 +537,6 @@ static inline void insert_journal_hash(struct reiserfs_journal_cnode **table,
 	journal_hash(table, cn->sb, cn->blocknr) = cn;
 }
 
-/*
- * Several mutexes depend on the write lock.
- * However sometimes we want to relax the write lock while we hold
- * these mutexes, according to the release/reacquire on schedule()
- * properties of the Bkl that were used.
- * Reiserfs performances and locking were based on this scheme.
- * Now that the write lock is a mutex and not the bkl anymore, doing so
- * may result in a deadlock:
- *
- * A acquire write_lock
- * A acquire j_commit_mutex
- * A release write_lock and wait for something
- * B acquire write_lock
- * B can't acquire j_commit_mutex and sleep
- * A can't acquire write lock anymore
- * deadlock
- *
- * What we do here is avoiding such deadlock by playing the same game
- * than the Bkl: if we can't acquire a mutex that depends on the write lock,
- * we release the write lock, wait a bit and then retry.
- *
- * The mutexes concerned by this hack are:
- * - The commit mutex of a journal list
- * - The flush mutex
- * - The journal lock
- */
-static inline void reiserfs_mutex_lock_safe(struct mutex *m,
-			       struct super_block *s)
-{
-	reiserfs_write_unlock(s);
-	mutex_lock(m);
-	reiserfs_write_lock(s);
-}
-
 /* lock the current transaction */
 static inline void lock_journal(struct super_block *sb)
 {

trunk/fs/reiserfs/xattr.c

@@ -975,7 +975,7 @@ int reiserfs_lookup_privroot(struct super_block *s)
 	int err = 0;
 
 	/* If we don't have the privroot located yet - go find it */
-	mutex_lock(&s->s_root->d_inode->i_mutex);
+	reiserfs_mutex_lock_safe(&s->s_root->d_inode->i_mutex, s);
 	dentry = lookup_one_len(PRIVROOT_NAME, s->s_root,
 				strlen(PRIVROOT_NAME));
 	if (!IS_ERR(dentry)) {
@@ -1011,7 +1011,7 @@ int reiserfs_xattr_init(struct super_block *s, int mount_flags)
 
 	if (privroot->d_inode) {
 		s->s_xattr = reiserfs_xattr_handlers;
-		mutex_lock(&privroot->d_inode->i_mutex);
+		reiserfs_mutex_lock_safe(&privroot->d_inode->i_mutex, s);
 		if (!REISERFS_SB(s)->xattr_root) {
 			struct dentry *dentry;
 			dentry = lookup_one_len(XAROOT_NAME, privroot,

trunk/include/linux/reiserfs_fs.h

@@ -62,6 +62,41 @@ void reiserfs_write_unlock(struct super_block *s);
 int reiserfs_write_lock_once(struct super_block *s);
 void reiserfs_write_unlock_once(struct super_block *s, int lock_depth);
 
+/*
+ * Several mutexes depend on the write lock.
+ * However sometimes we want to relax the write lock while we hold
+ * these mutexes, according to the release/reacquire on schedule()
+ * properties of the Bkl that were used.
+ * Reiserfs performances and locking were based on this scheme.
+ * Now that the write lock is a mutex and not the bkl anymore, doing so
+ * may result in a deadlock:
+ *
+ * A acquire write_lock
+ * A acquire j_commit_mutex
+ * A release write_lock and wait for something
+ * B acquire write_lock
+ * B can't acquire j_commit_mutex and sleep
+ * A can't acquire write lock anymore
+ * deadlock
+ *
+ * What we do here is avoiding such deadlock by playing the same game
+ * than the Bkl: if we can't acquire a mutex that depends on the write lock,
+ * we release the write lock, wait a bit and then retry.
+ *
+ * The mutexes concerned by this hack are:
+ * - The commit mutex of a journal list
+ * - The flush mutex
+ * - The journal lock
+ * - The inode mutex
+ */
+static inline void reiserfs_mutex_lock_safe(struct mutex *m,
+			       struct super_block *s)
+{
+	reiserfs_write_unlock(s);
+	mutex_lock(m);
+	reiserfs_write_lock(s);
+}
+
 /*
  * When we schedule, we usually want to also release the write lock,
  * according to the previous bkl based locking scheme of reiserfs.