[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171022235334.GH3310@X58A-UD3R>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 08:53:35 +0900
From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, tj@...nel.org,
johannes.berg@...el.com, oleg@...hat.com, amir73il@...il.com,
david@...morbit.com, darrick.wong@...cle.com,
linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, idryomov@...il.com,
kernel-team@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] lockdep: Assign a lock_class per gendisk used for
wait_for_completion()
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 07:44:51AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> The Subject prefix for this should be "block:".
>
> > @@ -945,7 +945,7 @@ int submit_bio_wait(struct bio *bio)
> > {
> > struct submit_bio_ret ret;
> >
> > - init_completion(&ret.event);
> > + init_completion_with_map(&ret.event, &bio->bi_disk->lockdep_map);
>
> FYI, I have an outstanding patch to simplify this a lot, which
> switches this to DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK. I can delay this or let
> you pick it up with your series, but we'll need a variant of
> DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK with the lockdep annotations.
Hello,
I'm sorry for late.
I think your patch makes block code simpler and better. I like it.
But, I just wonder if it's related to my series. Is it proper to add
your patch into my series?
Thanks,
Byungchul
> Patch below for reference:
>
> ---
> >From d65b89843c9f82c0744643515ba51dd10e66e67b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
> Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 18:31:02 +0200
> Subject: block: use DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK in submit_bio_wait
>
> Simplify the code by getting rid of the submit_bio_ret structure.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
> ---
> block/bio.c | 19 +++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/bio.c b/block/bio.c
> index 8338304ea256..4e18e959fc0a 100644
> --- a/block/bio.c
> +++ b/block/bio.c
> @@ -917,17 +917,9 @@ int bio_iov_iter_get_pages(struct bio *bio, struct iov_iter *iter)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(bio_iov_iter_get_pages);
>
> -struct submit_bio_ret {
> - struct completion event;
> - int error;
> -};
> -
> static void submit_bio_wait_endio(struct bio *bio)
> {
> - struct submit_bio_ret *ret = bio->bi_private;
> -
> - ret->error = blk_status_to_errno(bio->bi_status);
> - complete(&ret->event);
> + complete(bio->bi_private);
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -943,16 +935,15 @@ static void submit_bio_wait_endio(struct bio *bio)
> */
> int submit_bio_wait(struct bio *bio)
> {
> - struct submit_bio_ret ret;
> + DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK(done);
>
> - init_completion(&ret.event);
> - bio->bi_private = &ret;
> + bio->bi_private = &done;
> bio->bi_end_io = submit_bio_wait_endio;
> bio->bi_opf |= REQ_SYNC;
> submit_bio(bio);
> - wait_for_completion_io(&ret.event);
> + wait_for_completion_io(&done);
>
> - return ret.error;
> + return blk_status_to_errno(bio->bi_status);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(submit_bio_wait);
>
> --
> 2.14.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists