[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120413165519.GA12233@google.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 09:55:19 -0700
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Cc: axboe@...nel.dk, ctalbott@...gle.com, rni@...gle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] blkcg: kill blkio_list and replace blkio_list_lock
with a mutex
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 09:32:26AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 04:29:33PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> Hi Tejun,
>
> > @@ -732,20 +732,21 @@ void blkio_policy_register(struct blkio_policy_type *blkiop)
> > {
> > struct request_queue *q;
> >
> > + mutex_lock(&blkcg_pol_mutex);
> > +
> > blkcg_bypass_start();
> > - spin_lock(&blkio_list_lock);
> >
> > BUG_ON(blkio_policy[blkiop->plid]);
>
> A minor nit. It might be a good idea to check that blkiop->plid is not
> greater than BLKIO_NR_POLICIES for both registration and unresitration
> functions to avoid touching memory beyond blkio_policy[] array.
I'm making ->plid to be dynamically allocated on registration anyway,
so I don't think it really matters. The updated unregistration
function does BUG_ON(blkio_policy[pol->plid] != pol) which should
catch stray plid.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists