[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/9] blkcg: drop unnecessary RCU locking
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 01:08:00PM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > Modifying blkgs require both blkcg and queue locks,
> > so read access can be done holding any lock.
> This is the point I am not getting. How blkg_lookup() is safe just
> under queue lock. What stops freeing up blkg associated with other
> queues. I thought caller needs to hold rcu_read_lock() also to
> make sure it can safely compare blkg->q == q and return the blkg
> belonging to the queue in question.

Ooh, you're right. I got confused. We should be holding either blkcg
lock or rcu_read_lock() across blkg_lookup(). Will update.



 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-17 19:19    [W:0.075 / U:3.148 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site