All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Tao Cui <cui.tao@linux.dev>
Cc: josef@toxicopanda.com, axboe@kernel.dk, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com,
	ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, cuitao@kylinos.cn,
	ameryhung@gmail.com, alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] blk-iocost: add BPF struct_ops cost model support
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2026 10:09:28 -1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0753eaa990c954aa56a0c5fa8ba302e2@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261028143534.135968-3-cui.tao@linux.dev>

Hello, Tao.

On Wed, Oct 28, 2026 at 10:35:31PM +0800, Tao Cui wrote:
> +/*
> +/*
> + * Deliver iocg_init()/iocg_free() to the cgroups already online on the

The comment opens with "/*" twice. clang warns "'/*' within block comment
[-Wcomment]" and CONFIG_WERROR builds break.

> +			/*
> +			 * A blkg which never went online never reached the
> +			 * radix tree, so it must not receive an init either;
> ...
> +			if (!iocg || !iocg->pd.online)
> +				continue;

blkg_create() adds a blkg to q->blkg_list only after radix_tree_insert()
succeeds, so the blkgs skipped here are the ones blkg_destroy() already
took offline, not ones that never reached the radix tree.

> +	if (!disk_live(disk)) {
> +		mutex_unlock(&q->rq_qos_mutex);
> +		blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(q, memflags);
> +		blkdev_put_no_open(bdev);
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	}

The guard() suggestion from v10 was only partly applied. This unlock,
unfreeze and put sequence is repeated on three error paths.

> +	/*
> +	 * Scope the mutex so the tail bdev put runs with blkcg_mutex
> +	 * already released: dropping the last device reference can
> +	 * reach disk_release() -> blkcg_exit_disk() ->
> +	 * blkg_destroy_all(), which takes q->blkcg_mutex.
> +	 */
> +	{
> +		guard(mutex)(&q->blkcg_mutex);

The bare { } block isn't necessary, and ioc_bpf_detach() has the same
block with the same comment. Can you drop them?

> +	/*
> +	 * The attachment is checked under rq_qos_mutex first, so an unmatched
> +	 * detach exits without freezing.
> +	 */
> +	mutex_lock(&q->rq_qos_mutex);
> +	spin_lock_irq(&q->queue_lock);
> +	ioc = q_to_ioc(q);
> +	if (ioc) {
> +		spin_lock(&ioc->lock);
> +		matched = ioc_attached_model_locked(ioc) == ops &&
> +			  ioc->bpf_link == link;
> ...

The same 11 lines check the attachment again after the freeze. The check
under rq_qos_mutex after the freeze is the one that matters.

> +/*
> + * Pluggable cost model interface for blk-iocost.
> + *
> + * A BPF struct_ops implementation can take over the cost model of one device.
> ...
> + * offline and its free. Both callbacks are called with ioc->lock held and must
> + * not sleep; the delivery points nest inside queue_lock except for iocg_free()
> + * from ioc_pd_free() in blkg_free_workfn().
> + */

This restates the attach mechanics and lists the call sites. The comments
and descriptions in general are still long and narrate mechanics.

Thanks.

--
tejun

  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-10-28 20:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-28 14:35 [RFC PATCH v11 0/5] blk-iocost: BPF struct_ops cost model Tao Cui
2026-10-28 14:35 ` [PATCH 1/5] blk-iocost: move shared definitions to blk-iocost.h Tao Cui
2026-10-28 20:09   ` Tejun Heo
2026-10-29 10:04     ` Tao Cui
2026-10-28 14:35 ` [PATCH 2/5] blk-iocost: add BPF struct_ops cost model support Tao Cui
2026-10-28 15:07   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-28 15:33   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-28 20:09   ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2026-10-29 10:11     ` Tao Cui
2026-10-28 14:35 ` [PATCH 3/5] selftests/bpf: add iocost cost model test Tao Cui
2026-10-28 14:57   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-28 15:33   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-28 20:09   ` Tejun Heo
2026-10-29 10:30     ` Tao Cui
2026-10-28 14:35 ` [PATCH 4/5] blk-iocost: add iocost_ioc_tick tracepoint for per-period device summary Tao Cui
2026-10-28 20:09   ` Tejun Heo
2026-10-29 10:31     ` Tao Cui
2026-10-28 14:35 ` [PATCH 5/5] docs: cgroup-v2: document the iocost BPF cost model attachment Tao Cui
2026-10-28 20:09   ` Tejun Heo
2026-10-29 10:33     ` Tao Cui
2026-10-28 15:58 ` [RFC PATCH v11 0/5] blk-iocost: BPF struct_ops cost model Alexei Starovoitov
2026-10-28 20:09   ` Tejun Heo
2026-10-29  9:55   ` Tao Cui
2026-10-28 20:09 ` Tejun Heo
2026-10-29  9:57   ` Tao Cui

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=0753eaa990c954aa56a0c5fa8ba302e2@kernel.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
    --cc=ameryhung@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=cui.tao@linux.dev \
    --cc=cuitao@kylinos.cn \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=josef@toxicopanda.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.