Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>

The problem is:
	Task0(device scan task)		Task1(device replace task)
	scan_one_device()
	mutex_lock(&uuid_mutex)
	device = find_device()
					mutex_lock(&device_list_mutex)
					lock_chunk()
					rm_and_free_source_device
					unlock_chunk()
					mutex_unlock(&device_list_mutex)
	check device

Destroying the target device if device replace fails also has the same problem.

We fix this problem by locking uuid_mutex during destroying source device or
target device, just like the device remove operation.

It is a temporary solution, we can fix this problem and make the code more
clear by atomic counter in the future.

Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>

There were several problems about chunk mutex usage:
- Lock chunk mutex when updating metadata. It would cause the nested
  deadlock because updating metadata might need allocate new chunks
  that need acquire chunk mutex. We remove chunk mutex at this case,
  because b-tree lock and other lock mechanism can help us.
- ABBA deadlock occured between device_list_mutex and chunk_mutex.
  When we update device status, we must acquire device_list_mutex at the
  beginning, and then we might get chunk_mutex during the device status
  update because we need allocate new chunks for metadata COW. But at
  most place, we acquire chunk_mutex at first and then acquire device list
  mutex. We need change the lock order.
- Some place we needn't acquire chunk_mutex. For example we needn't get
  chunk_mutex when we free a empty seed fs_devices structure.

Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>

->total_bytes,->disk_total_bytes,->bytes_used is protected by chunk
lock when we change them, but sometimes we read them without any lock,
and we might get unexpected value. We fix this problem like inode's
i_size.

Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>

device->bytes_used will be changed when allocating a new chunk, and
disk_total_size will be changed if resizing is successful.
Meanwhile, the on-disk super blocks of the previous transaction
might not be updated. Considering the consistency of the metadata
in the previous transaction, We should use the size in the previous
transaction to check if the super block is beyond the boundary
of the device.

Though it is not big problem because we don't use it now, but anyway
it is better that we make it be consistent with the common metadata,
maybe we will use it in the future.

Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>

total_size will be changed when resizing a device, and disk_total_size
will be changed if resizing is successful. Meanwhile, the on-disk super
blocks of the previous transaction might not be updated. Considering
the consistency of the metadata in the previous transaction, We should
use the size in the previous transaction to check if the super block is
beyond the boundary of the device. Fix it.

Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>

We didn't protect the assignment of the target device, it might cause the
problem that the super block update was skipped because we might find wrong
size of the target device during the assignment. Fix it by moving the
assignment sentences into the initialization function of the target device.
And there is another merit that we can check if the target device is suitable
more early.

Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>

Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>

btrfs-transacion:5657
[stack snip]
btrfs_bio_map()
    btrfs_bio_counter_inc_blocked()
        percpu_counter_inc(&fs_info->bio_counter)  ###bio_counter > 0(A)
        __btrfs_bio_map()
            btrfs_dev_replace_lock()
                mutex_lock(dev_replace->lock)	   ###wait mutex(B)

btrfs:32612
[stack snip]
btrfs_dev_replace_start()
    btrfs_dev_replace_lock()
	mutex_lock(dev_replace->lock)		   ###hold mutex(B)
    btrfs_dev_replace_finishing()
        btrfs_rm_dev_replace_blocked()
            wait until percpu_counter_sum == 0	   ###wait on bio_counter(A)

This bug can be triggered quite easily by the following test script:
http://pastebin.com/MQmb37Cy

This patch will fix the ABBA problem by calling
btrfs_dev_replace_unlock() before btrfs_rm_dev_replace_blocked().

The consistency of btrfs devices list and their superblocks is protected
by device_list_mutex, not btrfs_dev_replace_lock/unlock().
So it is safe the move btrfs_dev_replace_unlock() before
btrfs_rm_dev_replace_blocked().

Reported-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Stefan Behrens <sbehrens@giantdisaster.de>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>

there is no matching open parenthesis for the closing parenthesis

Signed-off-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>