From: Madhuparna Bhowmik madhuparnabhowmik10@gmail.com
[ Upstream commit 29566c9c773456467933ee22bbca1c2b72a3506c ]
The space_info list is normally RCU protected and should be traversed with rcu_read_lock held. There's a warning
[29.104756] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage [29.105046] 5.6.0-rc4-next-20200305 #1 Not tainted [29.105231] ----------------------------- [29.105401] fs/btrfs/block-group.c:2011 RCU-list traversed in non-reader section!!
pointing out that the locking is missing in btrfs_read_block_groups. However this is not necessary as the list traversal happens at mount time when there's no other thread potentially accessing the list.
To fix the warning and for consistency let's add the RCU lock/unlock, the code won't be affected much as it's doing some lightweight operations.
Reported-by: Guenter Roeck linux@roeck-us.net Signed-off-by: Madhuparna Bhowmik madhuparnabhowmik10@gmail.com Reviewed-by: David Sterba dsterba@suse.com Signed-off-by: David Sterba dsterba@suse.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org --- fs/btrfs/block-group.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c index 7dcfa7d7632a1..95330f40f998c 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c @@ -1829,6 +1829,7 @@ int btrfs_read_block_groups(struct btrfs_fs_info *info) } }
+ rcu_read_lock(); list_for_each_entry_rcu(space_info, &info->space_info, list) { if (!(btrfs_get_alloc_profile(info, space_info->flags) & (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10 | @@ -1849,6 +1850,7 @@ int btrfs_read_block_groups(struct btrfs_fs_info *info) list) inc_block_group_ro(cache, 1); } + rcu_read_unlock();
btrfs_init_global_block_rsv(info); ret = check_chunk_block_group_mappings(info);