In an overlay directory that shadows an empty lower directory, say
/mnt/a/empty102, do:
touch /mnt/a/empty102/x
unlink /mnt/a/empty102/x
rmdir /mnt/a/empty102
It's actually harmless, but needs another level of nesting between
I_MUTEX_CHILD and I_MUTEX_NORMAL.
Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
Tested-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
}
mutex_lock_nested(&p1->d_inode->i_mutex, I_MUTEX_PARENT);
- mutex_lock_nested(&p2->d_inode->i_mutex, I_MUTEX_CHILD);
+ mutex_lock_nested(&p2->d_inode->i_mutex, I_MUTEX_PARENT2);
return NULL;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(lock_rename);
{
struct ovl_cache_entry *p;
- mutex_lock_nested(&upper->d_inode->i_mutex, I_MUTEX_PARENT);
+ mutex_lock_nested(&upper->d_inode->i_mutex, I_MUTEX_CHILD);
list_for_each_entry(p, list, l_node) {
struct dentry *dentry;
* 2: child/target
* 3: xattr
* 4: second non-directory
- * The last is for certain operations (such as rename) which lock two
+ * 5: second parent (when locking independent directories in rename)
+ *
+ * I_MUTEX_NONDIR2 is for certain operations (such as rename) which lock two
* non-directories at once.
*
* The locking order between these classes is
- * parent -> child -> normal -> xattr -> second non-directory
+ * parent[2] -> child -> grandchild -> normal -> xattr -> second non-directory
*/
enum inode_i_mutex_lock_class
{
I_MUTEX_PARENT,
I_MUTEX_CHILD,
I_MUTEX_XATTR,
- I_MUTEX_NONDIR2
+ I_MUTEX_NONDIR2,
+ I_MUTEX_PARENT2,
};
void lock_two_nondirectories(struct inode *, struct inode*);