[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1489783004.2826.13.camel@sandisk.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 20:36:58 +0000
From: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@...disk.com>
To: "tom.leiming@...il.com" <tom.leiming@...il.com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"hch@...radead.org" <hch@...radead.org>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"yizhan@...hat.com" <yizhan@...hat.com>,
"axboe@...com" <axboe@...com>, "tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] blk-mq: start to freeze queue just after setting
dying
On Sat, 2017-03-18 at 02:32 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 1:32 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > + /*
> > + * Avoid that the updates of the queue flags and q_usage_counter
> > + * are reordered.
> > + */
> > + smp_wmb();
>
> atomic_inc_return() in blk_mq_freeze_queue_start() does imply a
> barrier(smp_mb()).
Hello Ming,
It's probably a good idea to mention that in a comment. The implementation
of blk_mq_freeze_queue_start() namely could be changed in the future such
that it uses another atomic operation that doesn't implicitly perform smp_mb().
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists