Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 09:14:28 -0800
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, ctalbott@google.com, rni@google.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] blkcg: drop unnecessary RCU locking
Message-ID: <20120217171428.GA29414@google.com>
References: <1329431878-28300-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org>
 <1329431878-28300-3-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org>
 <20120217161958.GB26620@redhat.com>
 <20120217170713.GA26575@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20120217170713.GA26575@google.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1259
Lines: 30

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 09:07:13AM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 11:19:58AM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 02:37:51PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > Now that blkg additions / removals are always done under both q and
> > > blkcg locks, the only place RCU locking is used is blkg_lookup() for
> > > lockless lookup.  This patch drops unncessary RCU locking replacing it
> > > with plain blkcg / q locking as necessary.
> > > 
> > > * blkg_lookup_create() and blkiocg_pre_destroy() already perform
> > >   proper locking and don't need RCU.  Dropped.
> > 
> > But blkg_lookup_create() is called under rcu() to protect blkcg pointer.
> > And blkg_lookup() is also happening under same rcu read lock. So I think
> > you can't drop rcu from blkg_lookup_create().
> 
> Ooh, right.  Will fix.

BTW, the reason this doesn't work is due to the broken percpu
allocation in blkg_alloc().  We should remove unnecessary rcu lockings
after updating stat allocation.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/