mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Cc: "oleg@redhat.com" <oleg@redhat.com>,
	"paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] blk-throttle: Couple of cleanup and fixes for limit update code
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 21:34:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D754146.1070206@fusionio.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110307202917.GI9540@redhat.com>

On 2011-03-07 21:29, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 09:13:45PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 2011-03-07 16:50, Vivek Goyal wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 06:42:48PM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
>>>> Hi Jens,
>>>>
>>>> Couple of throttle fixes seem to have fallen through cracks.
>>>>
>>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/12/15/331
>>>>
>>>> I am reposting it for inclusion. Please let me know if you have any concerns.
>>>> Oleg and Paul acked the patch in the past so I am retaining their Reviewed-by:
>>>> lines.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Jens,
>>>
>>> Can you please apply following patches for 2.6.39. These are good for fixing
>>> couple of race conditions in block throttle code w.r.t limit updates.
>>> Please let me know if you have concernes with these patches.
>>
>> I have applied them now. 2/2 is a nice cleanup. But it does not apply
>> cleanly after the workqueue change we merged last week. I fixed it up
>> for you, manually applied hunk #5 and added the below diff. Please
>> inspect the end result. You should have rebased that patch.
> 
> Sorry, this patch was posted before workqueue change last week. I should
> have rebased and reposted it before pinging you again. Will take care of
> it next time onwards.
> 
>>
>> Also note that you seem to have a double xchg() in there, also added
>> from 2/2.
> 
> Actually one xchg is tracking per group limit changes (tg) and one xchg()
> it tracking overall limit change per queue (td), meaning if any of
> the group on this queue has changed the limit or not. That avoids
> traversal of list of all the groups if none of the group has changed
> the limit.

Irk, it's the tg and td looking too similar. It's indeed not a double
xhcg(), sorry for the noise.

-- 
Jens Axboe


      reply	other threads:[~2011-03-07 20:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-02-21 23:42 Vivek Goyal
2011-02-21 23:42 ` [PATCH 1/2] blk-throttle: process limit change only through one function Vivek Goyal
2011-02-21 23:42 ` [PATCH 2/2] blk-throttle: Some cleanups and race fixes in limit update code Vivek Goyal
2011-03-07 15:50 ` [PATCH 0/2] blk-throttle: Couple of cleanup and fixes for " Vivek Goyal
2011-03-07 20:13   ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-07 20:29     ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-07 20:34       ` Jens Axboe [this message]

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=4D754146.1070206@fusionio.com \
    --to=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.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