btrfs: assert that extent buffers are write locked instead of only locked

We currently use lockdep_assert_held() at btrfs_assert_tree_locked(), and
that checks that we hold a lock either in read mode or write mode.

However in all contexts we use btrfs_assert_tree_locked(), we actually
want to check if we are holding a write lock on the extent buffer's rw
semaphore - it would be a bug if in any of those contexts we were holding
a read lock instead.

So change btrfs_assert_tree_locked() to use lockdep_assert_held_write()
instead and, to make it more explicit, rename btrfs_assert_tree_locked()
to btrfs_assert_tree_write_locked(), so that it's clear we want to check
we are holding a write lock.

For now there are no contexts where we want to assert that we must have
a read lock, but in case that is needed in the future, we can add a new
helper function that just calls out lockdep_assert_held_read().

Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
index e4b3eaee716a..ec5de19f0acd 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
@@ -5836,13 +5836,13 @@ int btrfs_drop_subtree(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
 		return -ENOMEM;
 	}
 
-	btrfs_assert_tree_locked(parent);
+	btrfs_assert_tree_write_locked(parent);
 	parent_level = btrfs_header_level(parent);
 	atomic_inc(&parent->refs);
 	path->nodes[parent_level] = parent;
 	path->slots[parent_level] = btrfs_header_nritems(parent);
 
-	btrfs_assert_tree_locked(node);
+	btrfs_assert_tree_write_locked(node);
 	level = btrfs_header_level(node);
 	path->nodes[level] = node;
 	path->slots[level] = 0;