@@ -395,3 +395,11 @@ void btrfs_set_work_high_priority(struct
{
set_bit(WORK_HIGH_PRIO_BIT, &work->flags);
}
+
+void btrfs_flush_workqueue(struct btrfs_workqueue *wq)
+{
+ if (wq->high)
+ flush_workqueue(wq->high->normal_wq);
+
+ flush_workqueue(wq->normal->normal_wq);
+}
@@ -44,5 +44,6 @@ void btrfs_set_work_high_priority(struct
struct btrfs_fs_info * __pure btrfs_work_owner(const struct btrfs_work *work);
struct btrfs_fs_info * __pure btrfs_workqueue_owner(const struct __btrfs_workqueue *wq);
bool btrfs_workqueue_normal_congested(const struct btrfs_workqueue *wq);
+void btrfs_flush_workqueue(struct btrfs_workqueue *wq);
#endif
@@ -3986,6 +3986,19 @@ void __cold close_ctree(struct btrfs_fs_
*/
btrfs_delete_unused_bgs(fs_info);
+ /*
+ * There might be existing delayed inode workers still running
+ * and holding an empty delayed inode item. We must wait for
+ * them to complete first because they can create a transaction.
+ * This happens when someone calls btrfs_balance_delayed_items()
+ * and then a transaction commit runs the same delayed nodes
+ * before any delayed worker has done something with the nodes.
+ * We must wait for any worker here and not at transaction
+ * commit time since that could cause a deadlock.
+ * This is a very rare case.
+ */
+ btrfs_flush_workqueue(fs_info->delayed_workers);
+
ret = btrfs_commit_super(fs_info);
if (ret)
btrfs_err(fs_info, "commit super ret %d", ret);