From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] block: change wait on bd_claiming to use a var_waitqueue, not a bit_waitqueue
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 21:12:02 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <68e8c574-1266-42e1-9d0d-ed837c7105b6@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240826063659.15327-2-neilb@suse.de>
On 8/26/24 12:30 AM, NeilBrown wrote:
> bd_prepare_to_claim() waits for a var to change, not for a bit to be
> cleared.
> So change from bit_waitqueue() to __var_waitqueue() and correspondingly
> use wake_up_var().
> This will allow a future patch which change the "bit" function to expect
> an "unsigned long *" instead of "void *".
Looks fine to me - since this one is separate from the series, I can snag
it and shove it into the block side so it'll make 6.12-rc1. Then at least
it won't be a dependency for the rest of the series post that.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-17 3:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-26 6:30 [PATCH 0/7 v2 RFC] Make wake_up_{bit,var} less fragile NeilBrown
2024-08-26 6:30 ` [PATCH 1/7] block: change wait on bd_claiming to use a var_waitqueue, not a bit_waitqueue NeilBrown
2024-09-17 3:12 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2024-09-17 21:54 ` NeilBrown
2024-09-17 3:13 ` (subset) " Jens Axboe
2024-08-26 6:30 ` [PATCH 2/7] sched: change wake_up_bit() and related function to expect unsigned long * NeilBrown
2024-09-16 11:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-09-16 11:48 ` NeilBrown
2024-09-16 18:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-09-16 20:37 ` NeilBrown
2024-08-26 6:31 ` [PATCH 3/7] sched: Improve documentation for wake_up_bit/wait_on_bit family of functions NeilBrown
2024-08-26 6:31 ` [PATCH 4/7] sched: Document wait_var_event() family of functions and wake_up_var() NeilBrown
2024-08-26 6:31 ` [PATCH 5/7] sched: Add test_and_clear_wake_up_bit() and atomic_dec_and_wake_up() NeilBrown
2024-08-26 6:31 ` [PATCH 6/7] sched: Add wait/wake interface for variable updated under a lock NeilBrown
2024-08-26 6:31 ` [PATCH 7/7] Block: switch bd_prepare_to_claim to use wait_var_event_mutex() NeilBrown
2024-09-15 23:52 ` [PATCH 0/7 v2 RFC] Make wake_up_{bit,var} less fragile NeilBrown
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=68e8c574-1266-42e1-9d0d-ed837c7105b6@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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.