[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fd1b4b38-4b0a-4897-8130-bb39ecf11c66@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2025 10:24:44 -0700
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>, dlemoal@...nel.org, hare@...e.de,
jack@...e.cz, tj@...nel.org, josef@...icpanda.com, axboe@...nel.dk,
yukuai3@...wei.com
Cc: cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yi.zhang@...wei.com, yangerkun@...wei.com,
johnny.chenyi@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] block, bfq: switch to use elevator lock
On 7/30/25 1:22 AM, Yu Kuai wrote:
> static sector_t bfq_io_struct_pos(void *io_struct, bool request)
> @@ -5301,8 +5301,6 @@ static struct request *bfq_dispatch_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
> struct bfq_queue *in_serv_queue;
> bool waiting_rq, idle_timer_disabled = false;
>
> - spin_lock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
> -
> in_serv_queue = bfqd->in_service_queue;
> waiting_rq = in_serv_queue && bfq_bfqq_wait_request(in_serv_queue);
>
Please restrict this patch to changing &bfqd->lock into bfqd->lock only.
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists