On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 04:07:31PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 08:27:11AM +0400, Slava Barinov wrote:
> >   And there's nothing in dmesg that could help user to understand what
> > happened. I've lost about ten minutes trying to understand what does
> > it want from me.
>Could you please show me what line does 'walk_down_proc+0x2b0/0x2e0 [btrfs]'
> refer to?

It's

6578         if (path->locks[level] && level > 0) {
6579                 btrfs_tree_unlock_rw(eb, path->locks[level]);
^^^^
6580                 path->locks[level] = 0;
6581         }
6582         return 0;

which calls btrfs_tree_unlock() and hits the

241 void btrfs_tree_unlock(struct extent_buffer *eb)
242 {
243         int blockers = atomic_read(&eb->blocking_writers);
244
245         BUG_ON(blockers > 1);
246
247         btrfs_assert_tree_locked(eb);

->

263 void btrfs_assert_tree_locked(struct extent_buffer *eb)
264 {
265         BUG_ON(!atomic_read(&eb->write_locks));
266 }


david
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to