--- linux-2.4.22/fs/nfs/write.c.fix4.notfinished	Tue Oct  7 08:15:56 2003
+++ linux-2.4.22/fs/nfs/write.c	Tue Oct  7 09:14:16 2003
@@ -248,6 +248,12 @@
 		err = nfs_writepage_async(NULL, inode, page, 0, offset);
 		if (err >= 0)
 			err = 0;
+		else if(err == -EDEADLK){
+			printk(KERN_WARNING "NFS DEBUG: EDEADLK returned, doing nfs_writepage_sync\n");
+			err = nfs_writepage_sync(NULL, inode, page, 0, offset);
+			if (err == offset)
+				err = 0;
+		}
 	} else {
 		err = nfs_writepage_sync(NULL, inode, page, 0, offset); 
 		if (err == offset)
@@ -292,19 +298,22 @@
  *	 & co. for the 'write append' case. For 2.5 we may want to consider
  *	 some form of hashing so as to perform well on random writes.
  */
-static inline void
+static inline int
 nfs_inode_add_request(struct inode *inode, struct nfs_page *req)
 {
 	struct list_head *pos, *head;
 	unsigned long pg_idx = page_index(req->wb_page);
 
 	if (!list_empty(&req->wb_hash))
-		return;
+		return 0;
 	if (!NFS_WBACK_BUSY(req))
 		printk(KERN_ERR "NFS: unlocked request attempted hashed!\n");
 	head = &inode->u.nfs_i.writeback;
 	if (list_empty(head))
-		igrab(inode);
+		if(!igrab(inode)){
+			printk(KERN_WARNING "NFS DEBUG: igrab failed!  Aborting async writepage.\n");
+			return -EDEADLK;
+		}
 	list_for_each_prev(pos, head) {
 		struct nfs_page *entry = nfs_inode_wb_entry(pos);
 		if (page_index(entry->wb_page) < pg_idx)
@@ -313,6 +322,7 @@
 	inode->u.nfs_i.npages++;
 	list_add(&req->wb_hash, pos);
 	req->wb_count++;
+	return 0;
 }
 
 /*
@@ -659,9 +669,15 @@
 		}
 
 		if (new) {
+			int error;
 			nfs_lock_request_dontget(new);
-			nfs_inode_add_request(inode, new);
+			error = nfs_inode_add_request(inode, new);
 			spin_unlock(&nfs_wreq_lock);
+			if(error < 0){
+				nfs_unlock_request(new);
+				nfs_release_request(new);
+				return ERR_PTR(error);
+			}
 			nfs_mark_request_dirty(new);
 			return new;
 		}