[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH UPDATED 11/11] blkcg: unify blkg's for blkcg policies
    On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 01:47:19PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
    > On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 04:44:35PM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
    > > Ok, looks like now it is needed because blkcg lock will just gurantee that
    > > blkg is around but blkg->pd[plid] can disappear if you are not holding
    > > blkio_list lock (update_root_blkgs).
    > >
    > > I am wondering if we should take blkcg->lock if blkg is on blkcg list and
    > > is being modified in place. That way, once we are switching elevator,
    > > we should be able to shoot down the policy data without taking blkio_list
    > > lock.
    > I think it gotta become something per-queue, not global, and if we
    > make it per-queue, it should be able to live inside queue_lock.

    Hmm... then blkiocg_reset_stats() will run into lock ordering issue. Can't
    hold queue lock inside blkcg lock. I guess you will do some kind of
    locking trick again as you did for io context logic.


     \ /
      Last update: 2012-02-03 22:57    [W:0.018 / U:1.848 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site