[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180109160258.GL3668920@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 08:02:58 -0800
From: "tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>
To: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com>
Cc: "jbacik@...com" <jbacik@...com>, "jack@...e.cz" <jack@...e.cz>,
"clm@...com" <clm@...com>, "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"hoeppner@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <hoeppner@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"sth@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <sth@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"kernel-team@...com" <kernel-team@...com>,
"asamymuthupa@...ron.com" <asamymuthupa@...ron.com>,
"linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
"jianchao.w.wang@...cle.com" <jianchao.w.wang@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] blk-mq: make blk_abort_request() trigger timeout path
On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 10:10:01PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Other req->deadline writes are protected by preempt_disable(),
> write_seqcount_begin(&rq->gstate_seq), write_seqcount_end(&rq->gstate_seq)
> and preempt_enable(). I think it's fine that the above req->deadline store
> does not have that protection but I also think that that deserves a comment.
Will add.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists