On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 10:15:31AM -0400, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
> diff --git a/blockdev.c b/blockdev.c
> index 71f793c4ab..5b79093155 100644
> --- a/blockdev.c
> +++ b/blockdev.c
> @@ -150,12 +150,15 @@ void blockdev_mark_auto_del(BlockBackend *blk)
>          return;
>      }
>  
> -    for (job = block_job_next(NULL); job; job = block_job_next(job)) {
> +    JOB_LOCK_GUARD();
> +
> +    for (job = block_job_next_locked(NULL); job;
> +         job = block_job_next_locked(job)) {
>          if (block_job_has_bdrv(job, blk_bs(blk))) {
>              AioContext *aio_context = job->job.aio_context;
>              aio_context_acquire(aio_context);

Is there a lock ordering rule for job_mutex and the AioContext lock? I
haven't audited the code, but there might be ABBA lock ordering issues.

> diff --git a/qemu-img.c b/qemu-img.c
> index 4cf4d2423d..289d88a156 100644
> --- a/qemu-img.c
> +++ b/qemu-img.c
> @@ -912,25 +912,30 @@ static void run_block_job(BlockJob *job, Error **errp)
>      int ret = 0;
>  
>      aio_context_acquire(aio_context);
> -    job_ref(&job->job);
> -    do {
> -        float progress = 0.0f;
> -        aio_poll(aio_context, true);
> +    WITH_JOB_LOCK_GUARD() {

Here the lock order is the opposite of above.