From: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Cc: "oleg@redhat.com" <oleg@redhat.com>,
"paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] blk-throttle: Couple of cleanup and fixes for limit update code
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 21:34:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D754146.1070206@fusionio.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110307202917.GI9540@redhat.com>
On 2011-03-07 21:29, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 09:13:45PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 2011-03-07 16:50, Vivek Goyal wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 06:42:48PM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
>>>> Hi Jens,
>>>>
>>>> Couple of throttle fixes seem to have fallen through cracks.
>>>>
>>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/12/15/331
>>>>
>>>> I am reposting it for inclusion. Please let me know if you have any concerns.
>>>> Oleg and Paul acked the patch in the past so I am retaining their Reviewed-by:
>>>> lines.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Jens,
>>>
>>> Can you please apply following patches for 2.6.39. These are good for fixing
>>> couple of race conditions in block throttle code w.r.t limit updates.
>>> Please let me know if you have concernes with these patches.
>>
>> I have applied them now. 2/2 is a nice cleanup. But it does not apply
>> cleanly after the workqueue change we merged last week. I fixed it up
>> for you, manually applied hunk #5 and added the below diff. Please
>> inspect the end result. You should have rebased that patch.
>
> Sorry, this patch was posted before workqueue change last week. I should
> have rebased and reposted it before pinging you again. Will take care of
> it next time onwards.
>
>>
>> Also note that you seem to have a double xchg() in there, also added
>> from 2/2.
>
> Actually one xchg is tracking per group limit changes (tg) and one xchg()
> it tracking overall limit change per queue (td), meaning if any of
> the group on this queue has changed the limit or not. That avoids
> traversal of list of all the groups if none of the group has changed
> the limit.
Irk, it's the tg and td looking too similar. It's indeed not a double
xhcg(), sorry for the noise.
--
Jens Axboe
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-07 20:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-21 23:42 [PATCH 0/2] blk-throttle: Couple of cleanup and fixes for limit update code Vivek Goyal
2011-02-21 23:42 ` [PATCH 1/2] blk-throttle: process limit change only through one function Vivek Goyal
2011-02-21 23:42 ` [PATCH 2/2] blk-throttle: Some cleanups and race fixes in limit update code Vivek Goyal
2011-03-07 15:50 ` [PATCH 0/2] blk-throttle: Couple of cleanup and fixes for " Vivek Goyal
2011-03-07 20:13 ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-07 20:29 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-07 20:34 ` Jens Axboe [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=4D754146.1070206@fusionio.com \
--to=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.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.