btrfs: introduce BTRFS_NESTING_COW for cow'ing blocks
When we COW a block we are holding a lock on the original block, and then we lock the new COW block. Because our lockdep maps are based on root + level, this will make lockdep complain. We need a way to indicate a subclass for locking the COW'ed block, so plumb through our btrfs_lock_nesting from btrfs_cow_block down to the btrfs_init_buffer, and then introduce BTRFS_NESTING_COW to be used for cow'ing blocks. The reason I've added all this extra infrastructure is because there will be need of different nesting classes in follow up patches. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
This commit is contained in:

committed by
David Sterba

parent
fd7ba1c120
commit
9631e4cc1a
@@ -24,6 +24,14 @@
|
||||
enum btrfs_lock_nesting {
|
||||
BTRFS_NESTING_NORMAL,
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* When we COW a block we are holding the lock on the original block,
|
||||
* and since our lockdep maps are rootid+level, this confuses lockdep
|
||||
* when we lock the newly allocated COW'd block. Handle this by having
|
||||
* a subclass for COW'ed blocks so that lockdep doesn't complain.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
BTRFS_NESTING_COW,
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* We are limited to MAX_LOCKDEP_SUBLCLASSES number of subclasses, so
|
||||
* add this in here and add a static_assert to keep us from going over
|
||||
|
Reference in New Issue
Block a user