Commit c2fd4c94 authored by NeilBrown's avatar NeilBrown

md/raid1: update next_resync under resync_lock.

raise_barrier() uses next_resync as part of its calculations, so it
really should be updated first, instead of afterwards.

next_resync is always used under resync_lock so update it under
resync lock to, just before it is used.  That is safest.

This could cause normal IO and resync IO to interact badly so
it suitable for -stable.

Fixes: 79ef3a8a
cc: stable@vger.kernel.org (v3.13+)
Signed-off-by: default avatarNeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
parent 23554960
......@@ -827,7 +827,7 @@ static void flush_pending_writes(struct r1conf *conf)
* there is no normal IO happeing. It must arrange to call
* lower_barrier when the particular background IO completes.
*/
static void raise_barrier(struct r1conf *conf)
static void raise_barrier(struct r1conf *conf, sector_t sector_nr)
{
spin_lock_irq(&conf->resync_lock);
......@@ -837,6 +837,7 @@ static void raise_barrier(struct r1conf *conf)
/* block any new IO from starting */
conf->barrier++;
conf->next_resync = sector_nr;
/* For these conditions we must wait:
* A: while the array is in frozen state
......@@ -2543,9 +2544,8 @@ static sector_t sync_request(struct mddev *mddev, sector_t sector_nr, int *skipp
bitmap_cond_end_sync(mddev->bitmap, sector_nr);
r1_bio = mempool_alloc(conf->r1buf_pool, GFP_NOIO);
raise_barrier(conf);
conf->next_resync = sector_nr;
raise_barrier(conf, sector_nr);
rcu_read_lock();
/*
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment