[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130102204527.GG11220@mtj.dyndns.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 15:45:27 -0500
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Cc: lizefan@...wei.com, axboe@...nel.dk,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ctalbott@...gle.com, rni@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 21/24] blkcg: make blkcg_print_blkgs() grab q locks
instead of blkcg lock
On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 02:27:00PM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 12:35:43PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Instead of holding blkcg->lock while walking ->blkg_list and executing
> > prfill(), RCU walk ->blkg_list and hold the blkg's queue lock while
> > executing prfill(). This makes prfill() implementations easier as
> > stats are mostly protected by queue lock.
> >
> > This will be used to implement hierarchical stats.
> >
>
> Hi Tejun,
>
> I think dropping blkcg->lock might be a problem. Using RCU we have made
> sure that blkg and q are around. But what about blkg->q.backing_dev_info.dev.
>
> We can follow bdi->dev pointer in blkg_dev_name(). I am not sure if we
> ever clear it from q or not when device goes away.
If the queue is dead, it wouldn't have policy enabled bit set which is
tested while holding queue lock, so I don't think it's gonna be a
problem.
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