From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Return-Path: Sender: Tejun Heo Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 17:26:03 -0700 From: Tejun Heo To: Dennis Zhou Cc: Jens Axboe , Johannes Weiner , Josef Bacik , kernel-team@fb.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/15] blkcg: remove additional reference to the css Message-ID: <20180901002603.GI1488037@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> References: <20180831015356.69796-1-dennisszhou@gmail.com> <20180831015356.69796-12-dennisszhou@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20180831015356.69796-12-dennisszhou@gmail.com> List-ID: Hello, On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 09:53:52PM -0400, Dennis Zhou wrote: > - css = cgroup_get_e_css(page->mem_cgroup->css.cgroup, &io_cgrp_subsys); > > - return __bio_associate_blkg_from_css(bio, css); > + rcu_read_lock(); > + > + while (true) { > + css = cgroup_e_css(page->mem_cgroup->css.cgroup, > + &io_cgrp_subsys); So, while they seem similar cgroup_e_css() and cgroup_get_e_css() behave very differently in terms of locking. cgroup_e_css() can only be used under cgroup_mutex because it is used during migration and has to test cgroup_ss_mask(). The right thing to do here would be renaming cgroup_e_css() to something else and add a new implementation which operates in the same way as cgroup_get_e_css(). BTW, this should have triggered lockdep warning. I'd strongly recommend testing with lockdep enabled. Other than that, looks good to me. Thanks. -- tejun