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;
Date:   Sun, 8 Jan 2023 18:02:40 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc:     axboe@kernel.dk, josef@toxicpanda.com, hch@lst.de,
        linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] blkcg: Drop unnecessary RCU read [un]locks from
 blkg_conf_prep/finish()
Message-ID: <20230108170240.GA19165@lst.de>
References: <20230105212432.289569-1-tj@kernel.org> <20230105212432.289569-2-tj@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230105212432.289569-2-tj@kernel.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 11:24:29AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Holding the queue lock now implies RCU read lock, so no need to use
> rcu_read_[un]lock() explicitly. This shouldn't cause any behavior changes.

How so?

> While at it, drop __acquires() annotation on the queue lock too. The
> __acquires() part was already out of sync and it doesn't catch anything that
> lockdep can't.

This makes sparse even more unhappy than it was before.  For now
please keep the annotation.