[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CE7B51CA.7DB9%Tomoki.Sekiyama@hds.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 22:36:39 +0000
From: Tomoki Sekiyama <tomoki.sekiyama@....com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"vgoyal@...hat.com" <vgoyal@...hat.com>
CC: Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com>,
"majianpeng@...il.com" <majianpeng@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] elevator: Fix a race in elevator switching and
md device initialization
Hi all,
Is this patchset going to be merged into 3.12?
Thanks,
--
Tomoki
On 9/23/13 16:14 , "Tejun Heo" <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
>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