]> git.ipfire.org Git - thirdparty/kernel/stable.git/commit
btrfs: don't set lock_owner when locking extent buffer for reading
authorZygo Blaxell <ce3g8jdj@umail.furryterror.org>
Thu, 9 Jun 2022 02:39:36 +0000 (22:39 -0400)
committerGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Thu, 9 Jan 2025 12:25:05 +0000 (13:25 +0100)
commitd5a30a6117eaee25a1aadf09ab3ae15223581b51
treeed80c403563291e21ba9ac9beeb9f1598110cfb5
parent51b03b7473a0d9dc4bc05ffed6c2c34fff26dc35
btrfs: don't set lock_owner when locking extent buffer for reading

[ Upstream commit 97e86631bccddfbbe0c13f9a9605cdef11d31296 ]

In 196d59ab9ccc "btrfs: switch extent buffer tree lock to rw_semaphore"
the functions for tree read locking were rewritten, and in the process
the read lock functions started setting eb->lock_owner = current->pid.
Previously lock_owner was only set in tree write lock functions.

Read locks are shared, so they don't have exclusive ownership of the
underlying object, so setting lock_owner to any single value for a
read lock makes no sense.  It's mostly harmless because write locks
and read locks are mutually exclusive, and none of the existing code
in btrfs (btrfs_init_new_buffer and print_eb_refs_lock) cares what
nonsense is written in lock_owner when no writer is holding the lock.

KCSAN does care, and will complain about the data race incessantly.
Remove the assignments in the read lock functions because they're
useless noise.

Fixes: 196d59ab9ccc ("btrfs: switch extent buffer tree lock to rw_semaphore")
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.15+
Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Zygo Blaxell <ce3g8jdj@umail.furryterror.org>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
fs/btrfs/locking.c