[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130923201412.GA28667@mtj.dyndns.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:14:12 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Tomoki Sekiyama <tomoki.sekiyama@....com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com>,
"vgoyal@...hat.com" <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
"majianpeng@...il.com" <majianpeng@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] elevator: Fix a race in elevator switching and md
device initialization
Hello,
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 08:11:55PM +0000, Tomoki Sekiyama wrote:
> >Hmm... why aren't we just changing elevator_init() to grab sysfs_lock
> >where necessary?
>
> The locking cannot be moved into elevator_init() because it is called
> from elevator_switch() path, where the request_queue's sysfs_lock is
> already taken.
>
> > It'd be more consistent with elevator_exit() that way.
>
> What elevator_exit() locks is elevator_queue's sysfs_lock, not
> request_queue's sysfs_lock. What we need here is request_queue's
> sysfs_lock.
Ah, okay.
Reviewed-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
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