[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c297cba9-5136-46b6-b2a4-5169a1a3f7cf@linux.dev>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 15:53:08 +0800
From: Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@...ux.dev>
To: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>, axboe@...nel.dk
Cc: josef@...icpanda.com, oleg@...hat.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, muchun.song@...ux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: remove redundant explicit memory barrier from
rq_qos waiter and waker
On 2024/10/21 16:52, Muchun Song wrote:
> The memory barriers in list_del_init_careful() and list_empty_careful()
> in pairs already handle the proper ordering between data.got_token
> and data.wq.entry. So remove the redundant explicit barriers. And also
> change a "break" statement to "return" to avoid redundant calling of
> finish_wait().
>
> Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Good catch! Just a small nit below, feel free to add:
Reviewed-by: Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@...ux.dev>
> ---
> block/blk-rq-qos.c | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-rq-qos.c b/block/blk-rq-qos.c
> index dc510f493ba57..9b0aa7dd6779f 100644
> --- a/block/blk-rq-qos.c
> +++ b/block/blk-rq-qos.c
> @@ -218,7 +218,6 @@ static int rq_qos_wake_function(struct wait_queue_entry *curr,
> return -1;
>
> data->got_token = true;
> - smp_wmb();
> wake_up_process(data->task);
> list_del_init_careful(&curr->entry);
> return 1;
> @@ -274,10 +273,9 @@ void rq_qos_wait(struct rq_wait *rqw, void *private_data,
> * which means we now have two. Put our local token
> * and wake anyone else potentially waiting for one.
> */
> - smp_rmb();
> if (data.got_token)
> cleanup_cb(rqw, private_data);
> - break;
> + return;
> }
Would it be better to move this acquire_inflight_cb() above out of
the do-while(1) since we rely on the waker to get inflight counter
for us?
Thanks.
> io_schedule();
> has_sleeper = true;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists