lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] fs-writeback: drop wb->list_lock during blk_finish_plug()
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 05:52:27PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > Are we really ok with waiting synchronously for an inode while holding
> > the plug? No chance of deadlock (waiting for IO that we've plugged)?
> > That issue is true even of the current code, though, and I have _not_
> > really thought that through, it's just a worry.
>
> Never mind. We still flush the plug on explicit scheduling events. I
> wonder why I thought we got rid of that. Some kind of "senior moment",

But flushing on schedule is a little different. It ends up calling
blk_schedule_flush_plug() which will hand off work to kblockd through
blk_run_queue_async()

Not a huge deal, but if we're scheduling to wait for that IO, we should
really run the plug ourselves so that we're not waiting for kblockd too.

-chris


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-09-12 04:41    [W:0.154 / U:0.180 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site