From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Cc: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: blk_throtl_exit taking q->queue_lock is problematic
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 18:24:19 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110221182419.3545cdbb@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110218150429.GB26654@redhat.com>
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 10:04:29 -0500 Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 02:33:25PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 22:19:52 -0500 Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > Noticed an inconsistency, raid10.c's additional locking also protects
> > > the bio_list_add() whereas raid1.c's doesn't. Seems the additional
> > > protection in raid10 isn't needed?
> >
> > Correct - not needed at all.
> > I put it there because it felt a little cleaner keeping the two 'lock's
> > together like the two 'unlock's. Probably confusing though...
>
> I guess you could use blk_plug_device_unlocked() to get rid of ugliness
> and this routine will take care of taking queue lock.
>
Yep, that gets rid of some ugliness.
I've made that change and will submit it in due course.
So blk_throtl doesn't need any change to avoid the problem with md - that
changes are made in md instead.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-21 7:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-16 7:31 NeilBrown
2011-02-16 15:53 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-17 0:35 ` NeilBrown
2011-02-17 1:10 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-17 5:55 ` NeilBrown
2011-02-17 15:01 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-17 16:59 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-18 2:40 ` NeilBrown
2011-02-18 3:19 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-02-18 3:33 ` NeilBrown
2011-02-18 14:04 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-02-18 15:04 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-21 7:24 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2011-02-21 14:42 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-18 15:05 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-17 20:00 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-18 1:57 ` NeilBrown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110221182419.3545cdbb@notabene.brown \
--to=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=snitzer@redhat.com \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome