-
Dave Chinner authored
Lockdep reports: ============================================= [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ] 3.9.0+ #3 Not tainted --------------------------------------------- setquota/28368 is trying to acquire lock: (sb_internal){++++.?}, at: [<c11e8846>] xfs_trans_alloc+0x26/0x50 but task is already holding lock: (sb_internal){++++.?}, at: [<c11e8846>] xfs_trans_alloc+0x26/0x50 from xfs_qm_scall_setqlim()->xfs_dqread() when a dquot needs to be allocated. xfs_qm_scall_setqlim() is starting a transaction and then not passing it into xfs_qm_dqet() and so it starts it's own transaction when allocating the dquot. Splat! Fix this by not allocating the dquot in xfs_qm_scall_setqlim() inside the setqlim transaction. This requires getting the dquot first (and allocating it if necessary) then dropping and relocking the dquot before joining it to the setqlim transaction. 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> (cherry picked from commit f648167f)
08fb3905