From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Nilay Shroff <nilay@linux.ibm.com>,
Shinichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] block: remove all debugfs dir & don't grab debugfs_mutex
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 10:41:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250217094132.GA30499@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250209122035.1327325-1-ming.lei@redhat.com>
On Sun, Feb 09, 2025 at 08:20:24PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The 1st 6 patch removes all kinds of debugfs dir entries of block layer,
> instead always retrieves them debugfs, so avoid to maintain block
> internal debugfs state.
I'm still not sure this is a good idea. Yes, unregistration is not
a fast path, but having to reconstruct path names to remove them
just creates annoying racyness. Now we'd need to make sure now
one is creating the same names at the same time. Which is probably
fine now, but something entirely non-obvious to keep it mind. There's
also a reason why the debugfs API isn't built that way to start with.
> The 7 patch removes debugfs_mutex for adding/removing debugfs entry
> because we needn't the protection any more, then one lockdep warning
> can be fixed.
I don't see the lockdep dependency anywhere in this thread, but I
assume it's the mess with updating nr_hw_queues again?
In that case the fix is going probably going to be the same
tag_set-wide lock Nilay is looking into for sysfs.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-17 9:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-09 12:20 [PATCH 0/7] block: remove all debugfs dir & don't grab debugfs_mutex Ming Lei
2025-02-09 12:20 ` [PATCH 1/7] block: remove hctx->debugfs_dir Ming Lei
2025-02-13 6:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-14 2:07 ` Ming Lei
2025-02-17 9:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-09 12:20 ` [PATCH 2/7] block: remove hctx->sched_debugfs_dir Ming Lei
2025-02-13 6:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-09 12:20 ` [PATCH 3/7] block: remove q->sched_debugfs_dir Ming Lei
2025-02-09 12:20 ` [PATCH 4/7] block: remove q->rqos_debugfs_dir Ming Lei
2025-02-09 12:20 ` [PATCH 5/7] block: remove rqos->debugfs_dir Ming Lei
2025-02-09 12:20 ` [PATCH 6/7] block: remove q->debugfs_dir Ming Lei
2025-02-09 12:20 ` [PATCH 7/7] block: don't grab q->debugfs_mutex Ming Lei
2025-02-09 16:54 ` kernel test robot
2025-02-10 0:52 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2025-02-10 1:42 ` Ming Lei
2025-02-10 7:01 ` Nilay Shroff
2025-02-10 8:15 ` Ming Lei
2025-02-10 8:25 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2025-02-10 8:39 ` Nilay Shroff
2025-02-10 13:36 ` Nilay Shroff
2025-02-17 9:41 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
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=20250217094132.GA30499@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=nilay@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com \
/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.