From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: paulmck@kernel.org,
"open list:BLOCK LAYER" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Annotate a racy read in blk_do_io_stat()
Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 07:28:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ef8c5f6d-17e3-4504-8560-b970912b9eae@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240510141921.883231-1-leitao@debian.org>
On 5/10/24 07:19, Breno Leitao wrote:
> diff --git a/block/blk.h b/block/blk.h
> index d9f584984bc4..57a1d73a0718 100644
> --- a/block/blk.h
> +++ b/block/blk.h
> @@ -353,7 +353,8 @@ int blk_dev_init(void);
> */
> static inline bool blk_do_io_stat(struct request *rq)
> {
> - return (rq->rq_flags & RQF_IO_STAT) && !blk_rq_is_passthrough(rq);
> + /* Disk stats reading isn’t critical, let it race */
> + return (data_race(rq->rq_flags) & RQF_IO_STAT) && !blk_rq_is_passthrough(rq);
> }
>
> void update_io_ticks(struct block_device *part, unsigned long now, bool end);
Why to annotate this race with data_race() instead of READ_ONCE()? Are
there any cases in which it is better to use data_race() than
READ_ONCE()?
Thanks,
Bart.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-10 14:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-10 14:19 Breno Leitao
2024-05-10 14:28 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2024-05-10 14:57 ` Breno Leitao
2024-05-10 15:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-10 16:20 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-05-10 17:08 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-10 20:30 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-05-10 22:35 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-10 23:22 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-05-11 0:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-13 8:13 ` Marco Elver
2024-05-14 23:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-15 7:58 ` Marco Elver
2024-05-15 12:48 ` Breno Leitao
2024-05-15 13:20 ` Marco Elver
2024-05-15 15:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-15 17:40 ` Marco Elver
2024-05-15 21:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-16 6:35 ` Marco Elver
2024-05-20 18:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=ef8c5f6d-17e3-4504-8560-b970912b9eae@acm.org \
--to=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®