btrfs: do not create raid sysfs entries under any locks

btrfs: do not create raid sysfs entries under any locks

While running xfstests btrfs/177 I got the following lockdep splat

  ======================================================
  WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
  5.9.0-rc3+ #5 Not tainted
  ------------------------------------------------------
  kswapd0/100 is trying to acquire lock:
  ffff97066aa56760 (&delayed_node->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_release_delayed_node.part.0+0x3f/0x330

  but task is already holding lock:
  ffffffff9fd74700 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: __fs_reclaim_acquire+0x5/0x30

  which lock already depends on the new lock.

  the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

  -> #3 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}:
	 fs_reclaim_acquire+0x65/0x80
	 slab_pre_alloc_hook.constprop.0+0x20/0x200
	 kmem_cache_alloc+0x37/0x270
	 alloc_inode+0x82/0xb0
	 iget_locked+0x10d/0x2c0
	 kernfs_get_inode+0x1b/0x130
	 kernfs_get_tree+0x136/0x240
	 sysfs_get_tree+0x16/0x40
	 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0
	 path_mount+0x434/0xc00
	 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120
	 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
	 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9

  -> #2 (kernfs_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
	 __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7e0
	 kernfs_add_one+0x23/0x150
	 kernfs_create_dir_ns+0x7a/0xb0
	 sysfs_create_dir_ns+0x60/0xb0
	 kobject_add_internal+0xc0/0x2c0
	 kobject_add+0x6e/0x90
	 btrfs_sysfs_add_block_group_type+0x102/0x160
	 btrfs_make_block_group+0x167/0x230
	 btrfs_alloc_chunk+0x54f/0xb80
	 btrfs_chunk_alloc+0x18e/0x3a0
	 find_free_extent+0xdf6/0x1210
	 btrfs_reserve_extent+0xb3/0x1b0
	 btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0xb0/0x310
	 alloc_tree_block_no_bg_flush+0x4a/0x60
	 __btrfs_cow_block+0x11a/0x530
	 btrfs_cow_block+0x104/0x220
	 btrfs_search_slot+0x52e/0x9d0
	 btrfs_insert_empty_items+0x64/0xb0
	 btrfs_new_inode+0x225/0x730
	 btrfs_create+0xab/0x1f0
	 lookup_open.isra.0+0x52d/0x690
	 path_openat+0x2a7/0x9e0
	 do_filp_open+0x75/0x100
	 do_sys_openat2+0x7b/0x130
	 __x64_sys_openat+0x46/0x70
	 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
	 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9

  -> #1 (&fs_info->chunk_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
	 __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7e0
	 btrfs_chunk_alloc+0x125/0x3a0
	 find_free_extent+0xdf6/0x1210
	 btrfs_reserve_extent+0xb3/0x1b0
	 btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0xb0/0x310
	 alloc_tree_block_no_bg_flush+0x4a/0x60
	 __btrfs_cow_block+0x11a/0x530
	 btrfs_cow_block+0x104/0x220
	 btrfs_search_slot+0x52e/0x9d0
	 btrfs_lookup_inode+0x2a/0x8f
	 __btrfs_update_delayed_inode+0x80/0x240
	 btrfs_commit_inode_delayed_inode+0x119/0x120
	 btrfs_evict_inode+0x357/0x500
	 evict+0xcf/0x1f0
	 do_unlinkat+0x1a9/0x2b0
	 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
	 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9

  -> #0 (&delayed_node->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
	 __lock_acquire+0x119c/0x1fc0
	 lock_acquire+0xa7/0x3d0
	 __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7e0
	 __btrfs_release_delayed_node.part.0+0x3f/0x330
	 btrfs_evict_inode+0x24c/0x500
	 evict+0xcf/0x1f0
	 dispose_list+0x48/0x70
	 prune_icache_sb+0x44/0x50
	 super_cache_scan+0x161/0x1e0
	 do_shrink_slab+0x178/0x3c0
	 shrink_slab+0x17c/0x290
	 shrink_node+0x2b2/0x6d0
	 balance_pgdat+0x30a/0x670
	 kswapd+0x213/0x4c0
	 kthread+0x138/0x160
	 ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30

  other info that might help us debug this:

  Chain exists of:
    &delayed_node->mutex --> kernfs_mutex --> fs_reclaim

   Possible unsafe locking scenario:

	 CPU0                    CPU1
	 ----                    ----
    lock(fs_reclaim);
				 lock(kernfs_mutex);
				 lock(fs_reclaim);
    lock(&delayed_node->mutex);

   *** DEADLOCK ***

  3 locks held by kswapd0/100:
   #0: ffffffff9fd74700 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: __fs_reclaim_acquire+0x5/0x30
   #1: ffffffff9fd65c50 (shrinker_rwsem){++++}-{3:3}, at: shrink_slab+0x115/0x290
   #2: ffff9706629780e0 (&type->s_umount_key#36){++++}-{3:3}, at: super_cache_scan+0x38/0x1e0

  stack backtrace:
  CPU: 1 PID: 100 Comm: kswapd0 Not tainted 5.9.0-rc3+ #5
  Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014
  Call Trace:
   dump_stack+0x8b/0xb8
   check_noncircular+0x12d/0x150
   __lock_acquire+0x119c/0x1fc0
   lock_acquire+0xa7/0x3d0
   ? __btrfs_release_delayed_node.part.0+0x3f/0x330
   __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7e0
   ? __btrfs_release_delayed_node.part.0+0x3f/0x330
   ? __btrfs_release_delayed_node.part.0+0x3f/0x330
   ? lock_acquire+0xa7/0x3d0
   ? find_held_lock+0x2b/0x80
   __btrfs_release_delayed_node.part.0+0x3f/0x330
   btrfs_evict_inode+0x24c/0x500
   evict+0xcf/0x1f0
   dispose_list+0x48/0x70
   prune_icache_sb+0x44/0x50
   super_cache_scan+0x161/0x1e0
   do_shrink_slab+0x178/0x3c0
   shrink_slab+0x17c/0x290
   shrink_node+0x2b2/0x6d0
   balance_pgdat+0x30a/0x670
   kswapd+0x213/0x4c0
   ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x41/0x50
   ? add_wait_queue_exclusive+0x70/0x70
   ? balance_pgdat+0x670/0x670
   kthread+0x138/0x160
   ? kthread_create_worker_on_cpu+0x40/0x40
   ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30

This happens because when we link in a block group with a new raid index
type we'll create the corresponding sysfs entries for it.  This is
problematic because while restriping we're holding the chunk_mutex, and
while mounting we're holding the tree locks.

Fixing this isn't pretty, we move the call to the sysfs stuff into the
btrfs_create_pending_block_groups() work, where we're not holding any
locks.  This creates a slight race where other threads could see that
there's no sysfs kobj for that raid type, and race to create the
sysfs dir.  Fix this by wrapping the creation in space_info->lock, so we
only get one thread calling kobject_add() for the new directory.  We
don't worry about the lock on cleanup as it only gets deleted on
unmount.

On mount it's more straightforward, we loop through the space_infos
already, just check every raid index in each space_info and added the
sysfs entries for the corresponding block groups.

Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>