[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZxmmPKFksWc5LLlc@fedora>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 09:43:24 +0800
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] nvme: core: switch to non_owner variant of
start_freeze/unfreeze queue
On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 02:21:15PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 05:54:34PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > @@ -4913,7 +4913,7 @@ void nvme_start_freeze(struct nvme_ctrl *ctrl)
> > set_bit(NVME_CTRL_FROZEN, &ctrl->flags);
> > srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&ctrl->srcu);
> > list_for_each_entry_rcu(ns, &ctrl->namespaces, list)
> > - blk_freeze_queue_start(ns->queue);
> > + blk_freeze_queue_start_non_owner(ns->queue);
>
> Maybe throw in a comment like:
>
> /*
> * Will be unfrozen at I/O completion time when called by
> * nvme_passthru_start.
> */
>
> so that it's clear why the non_owner version is used here.
There are one more such usage:
- freeze in nvme_dev_disable()/apple_nvme_disable() from timeout work, but
unfreeze in nvme_reset_work()
Thanks,
Ming
Powered by blists - more mailing lists