[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <174429540114.22824.14246125911839557664.b4-ty@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 10:30:10 -0400
From: cel@...nel.org
To: jlayton@...nel.org,
neilb@...e.de,
okorniev@...hat.com,
Dai.Ngo@...cle.com,
tom@...pey.com,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Li Lingfeng <lilingfeng3@...wei.com>
Cc: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
yukuai1@...weicloud.com,
houtao1@...wei.com,
yi.zhang@...wei.com,
yangerkun@...wei.com,
lilingfeng@...weicloud.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfsd: decrease sc_count directly if fail to queue dl_recall
From: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 09:57:08 +0800, Li Lingfeng wrote:
> A deadlock warning occurred when invoking nfs4_put_stid following a failed
> dl_recall queue operation:
> T1 T2
> nfs4_laundromat
> nfs4_get_client_reaplist
> nfs4_anylock_blockers
> __break_lease
> spin_lock // ctx->flc_lock
> spin_lock // clp->cl_lock
> nfs4_lockowner_has_blockers
> locks_owner_has_blockers
> spin_lock // flctx->flc_lock
> nfsd_break_deleg_cb
> nfsd_break_one_deleg
> nfs4_put_stid
> refcount_dec_and_lock
> spin_lock // clp->cl_lock
>
> [...]
Applied to nfsd-testing, thanks!
[1/1] nfsd: decrease sc_count directly if fail to queue dl_recall
commit: e8f1e5f463b88ce923eefac447abc2079075f921
--
Chuck Lever
Powered by blists - more mailing lists