When running with -o enospc_debug you can get the following splat if one
of the dump_space_info's trip

  ======================================================
  WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
  5.8.0-rc5+ #20 Tainted: G           OE
  ------------------------------------------------------
  dd/563090 is trying to acquire lock:
  ffff9e7dbf4f1e18 (&ctl->tree_lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: btrfs_dump_free_space+0x2b/0xa0 [btrfs]

  but task is already holding lock:
  ffff9e7e2284d428 (&cache->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: btrfs_dump_space_info+0xaa/0x120 [btrfs]

  which lock already depends on the new lock.

  the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

  -> #3 (&cache->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}:
	 _raw_spin_lock+0x25/0x30
	 btrfs_add_reserved_bytes+0x3c/0x3c0 [btrfs]
	 find_free_extent+0x7ef/0x13b0 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_reserve_extent+0x9b/0x180 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0xc1/0x340 [btrfs]
	 alloc_tree_block_no_bg_flush+0x4a/0x60 [btrfs]
	 __btrfs_cow_block+0x122/0x530 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_cow_block+0x106/0x210 [btrfs]
	 commit_cowonly_roots+0x55/0x300 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_commit_transaction+0x4ed/0xac0 [btrfs]
	 sync_filesystem+0x74/0x90
	 generic_shutdown_super+0x22/0x100
	 kill_anon_super+0x14/0x30
	 btrfs_kill_super+0x12/0x20 [btrfs]
	 deactivate_locked_super+0x36/0x70
	 cleanup_mnt+0x104/0x160
	 task_work_run+0x5f/0x90
	 __prepare_exit_to_usermode+0x1bd/0x1c0
	 do_syscall_64+0x5e/0xb0
	 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9

  -> #2 (&space_info->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}:
	 _raw_spin_lock+0x25/0x30
	 btrfs_block_rsv_release+0x1a6/0x3f0 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_inode_rsv_release+0x4f/0x170 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_clear_delalloc_extent+0x155/0x480 [btrfs]
	 clear_state_bit+0x81/0x1a0 [btrfs]
	 __clear_extent_bit+0x25c/0x5d0 [btrfs]
	 clear_extent_bit+0x15/0x20 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_invalidatepage+0x2b7/0x3c0 [btrfs]
	 truncate_cleanup_page+0x47/0xe0
	 truncate_inode_pages_range+0x238/0x840
	 truncate_pagecache+0x44/0x60
	 btrfs_setattr+0x202/0x5e0 [btrfs]
	 notify_change+0x33b/0x490
	 do_truncate+0x76/0xd0
	 path_openat+0x687/0xa10
	 do_filp_open+0x91/0x100
	 do_sys_openat2+0x215/0x2d0
	 do_sys_open+0x44/0x80
	 do_syscall_64+0x52/0xb0
	 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9

  -> #1 (&tree->lock#2){+.+.}-{2:2}:
	 _raw_spin_lock+0x25/0x30
	 find_first_extent_bit+0x32/0x150 [btrfs]
	 write_pinned_extent_entries.isra.0+0xc5/0x100 [btrfs]
	 __btrfs_write_out_cache+0x172/0x480 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_write_out_cache+0x7a/0xf0 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_write_dirty_block_groups+0x286/0x3b0 [btrfs]
	 commit_cowonly_roots+0x245/0x300 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_commit_transaction+0x4ed/0xac0 [btrfs]
	 close_ctree+0xf9/0x2f5 [btrfs]
	 generic_shutdown_super+0x6c/0x100
	 kill_anon_super+0x14/0x30
	 btrfs_kill_super+0x12/0x20 [btrfs]
	 deactivate_locked_super+0x36/0x70
	 cleanup_mnt+0x104/0x160
	 task_work_run+0x5f/0x90
	 __prepare_exit_to_usermode+0x1bd/0x1c0
	 do_syscall_64+0x5e/0xb0
	 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9

  -> #0 (&ctl->tree_lock){+.+.}-{2:2}:
	 __lock_acquire+0x1240/0x2460
	 lock_acquire+0xab/0x360
	 _raw_spin_lock+0x25/0x30
	 btrfs_dump_free_space+0x2b/0xa0 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_dump_space_info+0xf4/0x120 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_reserve_extent+0x176/0x180 [btrfs]
	 __btrfs_prealloc_file_range+0x145/0x550 [btrfs]
	 cache_save_setup+0x28d/0x3b0 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_start_dirty_block_groups+0x1fc/0x4f0 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_commit_transaction+0xcc/0xac0 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_alloc_data_chunk_ondemand+0x162/0x4c0 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_check_data_free_space+0x4c/0xa0 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_buffered_write.isra.0+0x19b/0x740 [btrfs]
	 btrfs_file_write_iter+0x3cf/0x610 [btrfs]
	 new_sync_write+0x11e/0x1b0
	 vfs_write+0x1c9/0x200
	 ksys_write+0x68/0xe0
	 do_syscall_64+0x52/0xb0
	 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9

  other info that might help us debug this:

  Chain exists of:
    &ctl->tree_lock --> &space_info->lock --> &cache->lock

   Possible unsafe locking scenario:

	 CPU0                    CPU1
	 ----                    ----
    lock(&cache->lock);
				 lock(&space_info->lock);
				 lock(&cache->lock);
    lock(&ctl->tree_lock);

   *** DEADLOCK ***

  6 locks held by dd/563090:
   #0: ffff9e7e21d18448 (sb_writers#14){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: vfs_write+0x195/0x200
   #1: ffff9e7dd0410ed8 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#19){++++}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_file_write_iter+0x86/0x610 [btrfs]
   #2: ffff9e7e21d18638 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: start_transaction+0x40b/0x5b0 [btrfs]
   #3: ffff9e7e1f05d688 (&cur_trans->cache_write_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_start_dirty_block_groups+0x158/0x4f0 [btrfs]
   #4: ffff9e7e2284ddb8 (&space_info->groups_sem){++++}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_dump_space_info+0x69/0x120 [btrfs]
   #5: ffff9e7e2284d428 (&cache->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: btrfs_dump_space_info+0xaa/0x120 [btrfs]

  stack backtrace:
  CPU: 3 PID: 563090 Comm: dd Tainted: G           OE     5.8.0-rc5+ #20
  Hardware name: To Be Filled By O.E.M. To Be Filled By O.E.M./890FX Deluxe5, BIOS P1.40 05/03/2011
  Call Trace:
   dump_stack+0x96/0xd0
   check_noncircular+0x162/0x180
   __lock_acquire+0x1240/0x2460
   ? wake_up_klogd.part.0+0x30/0x40
   lock_acquire+0xab/0x360
   ? btrfs_dump_free_space+0x2b/0xa0 [btrfs]
   _raw_spin_lock+0x25/0x30
   ? btrfs_dump_free_space+0x2b/0xa0 [btrfs]
   btrfs_dump_free_space+0x2b/0xa0 [btrfs]
   btrfs_dump_space_info+0xf4/0x120 [btrfs]
   btrfs_reserve_extent+0x176/0x180 [btrfs]
   __btrfs_prealloc_file_range+0x145/0x550 [btrfs]
   ? btrfs_qgroup_reserve_data+0x1d/0x60 [btrfs]
   cache_save_setup+0x28d/0x3b0 [btrfs]
   btrfs_start_dirty_block_groups+0x1fc/0x4f0 [btrfs]
   btrfs_commit_transaction+0xcc/0xac0 [btrfs]
   ? start_transaction+0xe0/0x5b0 [btrfs]
   btrfs_alloc_data_chunk_ondemand+0x162/0x4c0 [btrfs]
   btrfs_check_data_free_space+0x4c/0xa0 [btrfs]
   btrfs_buffered_write.isra.0+0x19b/0x740 [btrfs]
   ? ktime_get_coarse_real_ts64+0xa8/0xd0
   ? trace_hardirqs_on+0x1c/0xe0
   btrfs_file_write_iter+0x3cf/0x610 [btrfs]
   new_sync_write+0x11e/0x1b0
   vfs_write+0x1c9/0x200
   ksys_write+0x68/0xe0
   do_syscall_64+0x52/0xb0
   entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9

This is because we're holding the block_group->lock while trying to dump
the free space cache.  However we don't need this lock, we just need it
to read the values for the printk, so move the free space cache dumping
outside of the block group lock.
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>