Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] blk-iocost: add refcounting for iocg
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>
Cc:     hch@infradead.org, josef@toxicpanda.com, axboe@kernel.dk,
        cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yi.zhang@huawei.com,
        "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
References: <20221227125502.541931-1-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>
 <20221227125502.541931-2-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>
 <Y7XzUee5Bq+DoIC1@slm.duckdns.org>
 <c63ee2ad-23d5-3be0-c731-28494398b391@huaweicloud.com>
 <Y7cX0SJ0y6+EIY5Q@slm.duckdns.org>
From:   Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>
Message-ID: <7dcdaef3-65c1-8175-fea7-53076f39697f@huaweicloud.com>
Date:   Fri, 6 Jan 2023 09:08:45 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <Y7cX0SJ0y6+EIY5Q@slm.duckdns.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

在 2023/01/06 2:32, Tejun Heo 写道:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 09:14:07AM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote:
>> 1) is related to blkg, while 2) is not, hence refcnting from blkg can't
>> fix the problem. refcnting from blkcg_policy_data should be ok, but I
>> see that bfq already has the similar refcnting, while other policy
>> doesn't require such refcnting.
> 
> Hmm... taking a step back, wouldn't this be solved by moving the first part
> of ioc_pd_free() to pd_offline_fn()? The ordering is strictly defined there,
> right?
> 

Moving first part to pd_offline_fn() has some requirements, like what I
did in the other thread:

iocg can be activated again after pd_offline_fn(), which is possible
because bio can be dispatched when cgroup is removed. I tried to avoid
that by:

1) dispatch all throttled bio io ioc_pd_offline()
2) don't throttle bio after ioc_pd_offline()

However, you already disagreed with that. ????

Thanks,
Kuai

> Thanks.
> 
> --
> tejun
> .
>