Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-87156-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Message-ID: <c3abe716-3d8f-47dc-9c7d-203b05b25393@kernel.dk>
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 10:19:36 -0700
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched/core: switch struct rq->nr_iowait to a normal
 int
Content-Language: en-US
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com
References: <20240228192355.290114-1-axboe@kernel.dk>
 <20240228192355.290114-2-axboe@kernel.dk> <8734tb8b57.ffs@tglx>
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
In-Reply-To: <8734tb8b57.ffs@tglx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 2/29/24 9:53 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28 2024 at 12:16, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> In 3 of the 4 spots where we modify rq->nr_iowait we already hold the
> 
> We modify something and hold locks? It's documented that changelogs
> should not impersonate code. It simply does not make any sense.

Agree it doesn't read that well... It's meant to say that we already
hold the rq lock in 3 of the 4 spots, hence using atomic_inc/dec is
pointless for those cases.

> Other than that:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

Thanks for the review!

-- 
Jens Axboe