rbd: don't assume RBD_LOCK_STATE_LOCKED for exclusive mappings

commit 2237ceb71f89837ac47c5dce2aaa2c2b3a337a3c upstream.

Every time a watch is reestablished after getting lost, we need to
update the cookie which involves quiescing exclusive lock.  For this,
we transition from RBD_LOCK_STATE_LOCKED to RBD_LOCK_STATE_QUIESCING
roughly for the duration of rbd_reacquire_lock() call.  If the mapping
is exclusive and I/O happens to arrive in this time window, it's failed
with EROFS (later translated to EIO) based on the wrong assumption in
rbd_img_exclusive_lock() -- "lock got released?" check there stopped
making sense with commit a2b1da09 ("rbd: lock should be quiesced on
reacquire").

To make it worse, any such I/O is added to the acquiring list before
EROFS is returned and this sets up for violating rbd_lock_del_request()
precondition that the request is either on the running list or not on
any list at all -- see commit ded080c8 ("rbd: don't move requests
to the running list on errors").  rbd_lock_del_request() ends up
processing these requests as if they were on the running list which
screws up quiescing_wait completion counter and ultimately leads to

    rbd_assert(!completion_done(&rbd_dev->quiescing_wait));

being triggered on the next watch error.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 06ef84c4e9c4: rbd: rename RBD_LOCK_STATE_RELEASING and releasing_wait
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Fixes: 637cd060 ("rbd: new exclusive lock wait/wake code")
Signed-off-by: Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Dongsheng Yang <dongsheng.yang@easystack.cn>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>