[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121029171346.GC3308@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 13:13:46 -0400
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: "Jun'ichi Nomura" <j-nomura@...jp.nec.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
device-mapper development <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] dm: stay in blk_queue_bypass until queue becomes
initialized
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 05:45:15PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-10-29 at 12:38 -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > Ok, so the question is what's wrong with calling synchronize_rcu() inside
> > a mutex with CONFIG_PREEMPT=y. I don't know. Ccing paul mckenney and
> > peterz.
>
> int blkcg_activate_policy(struct request_queue *q,
>
> {
>
> ...
>
> preloaded = !radix_tree_preload(GFP_KERNEL);
>
> blk_queue_bypass_start(q);
>
>
>
>
> where:
>
> int radix_tree_preload(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> {
> struct radix_tree_preload *rtp;
> struct radix_tree_node *node;
> int ret = -ENOMEM;
>
> preempt_disable();
>
>
> Seems obvious why it explodes..
Oh right. Thanks Peter. So just calling blk_queue_bypass_start() before
radix_tree_preload() should fix it. Junichi, can you please give it
a try.
Thanks
Vivek
--
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