Btrfs: fix lockdep deadlock warning due to dev_replace

Xfstests btrfs/011 complains about a deadlock warning,

[ 1226.649039] =========================================================
[ 1226.649039] [ INFO: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected ]
[ 1226.649039] 4.1.0+ #270 Not tainted
[ 1226.649039] ---------------------------------------------------------
[ 1226.652955] kswapd0/46 just changed the state of lock:
[ 1226.652955]  (&delayed_node->mutex){+.+.-.}, at: [<ffffffff81458735>] __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x45/0x1d0
[ 1226.652955] but this lock took another, RECLAIM_FS-unsafe lock in the past:
[ 1226.652955]  (&fs_info->dev_replace.lock){+.+.+.}

and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them.

[ 1226.652955]
other info that might help us debug this:
[ 1226.652955] Chain exists of:
  &delayed_node->mutex --> &found->groups_sem --> &fs_info->dev_replace.lock

[ 1226.652955]  Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario:

[ 1226.652955]        CPU0                    CPU1
[ 1226.652955]        ----                    ----
[ 1226.652955]   lock(&fs_info->dev_replace.lock);
[ 1226.652955]                                local_irq_disable();
[ 1226.652955]                                lock(&delayed_node->mutex);
[ 1226.652955]                                lock(&found->groups_sem);
[ 1226.652955]   <Interrupt>
[ 1226.652955]     lock(&delayed_node->mutex);
[ 1226.652955]
 *** DEADLOCK ***

Commit 084b6e7c7607 ("btrfs: Fix a lockdep warning when running xfstest.") tried
to fix a similar one that has the exactly same warning, but with that, we still
run to this.

The above lock chain comes from
btrfs_commit_transaction
  ->btrfs_run_delayed_items
    ...
    ->__btrfs_update_delayed_inode
      ...
      ->__btrfs_cow_block
         ...
         ->find_free_extent
            ->cache_block_group
              ->load_free_space_cache
                ->btrfs_readpages
                  ->submit_one_bio
                    ...
                    ->__btrfs_map_block
                      ->btrfs_dev_replace_lock

However, with high memory pressure, tasks which hold dev_replace.lock can
be interrupted by kswapd and then kswapd is intended to release memory occupied
by superblock, inodes and dentries, where we may call evict_inode, and it comes
to

[ 1226.652955]  [<ffffffff81458735>] __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x45/0x1d0
[ 1226.652955]  [<ffffffff81459e74>] btrfs_remove_delayed_node+0x24/0x30
[ 1226.652955]  [<ffffffff8140c5fe>] btrfs_evict_inode+0x34e/0x700

delayed_node->mutex may be acquired in __btrfs_release_delayed_node(), and it leads
to a ABBA deadlock.

To fix this, we can use "blocking rwlock" used in the case of extent_buffer, but
things are simpler here since we only needs read's spinlock to blocking lock.

With this, btrfs/011 no more produces warnings in dmesg.

Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

1 files changed, 4 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
index 4545e2e2ad45..81d0f39c2266 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
@@ -2272,9 +2272,11 @@ static void btrfs_init_dev_replace_locks(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
 	fs_info->dev_replace.lock_owner = 0;
 	atomic_set(&fs_info->dev_replace.nesting_level, 0);
 	mutex_init(&fs_info->dev_replace.lock_finishing_cancel_unmount);
-	mutex_init(&fs_info->dev_replace.lock_management_lock);
-	mutex_init(&fs_info->dev_replace.lock);
+	rwlock_init(&fs_info->dev_replace.lock);
+	atomic_set(&fs_info->dev_replace.read_locks, 0);
+	atomic_set(&fs_info->dev_replace.blocking_readers, 0);
 	init_waitqueue_head(&fs_info->replace_wait);
+	init_waitqueue_head(&fs_info->dev_replace.read_lock_wq);
 }
 
 static void btrfs_init_qgroup(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)