From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
axboe@kernel.dk, josef@toxicpanda.com,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] blkcg: Drop unnecessary RCU read [un]locks from blkg_conf_prep/finish()
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2023 07:49:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230110064900.GA10277@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y7x9t+4EwXFl7OwS@slm.duckdns.org>
On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 10:48:55AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Now that all RCU flavors have been combined, holding a spin lock, disabling
> irq, disabling preemption all imply RCU read lock.
Can you write it like this in the commit log, please?
> I can drop the changes but this actually bothers me. The annotation has been
> broken for a *long* time and nobody noticed. Furthermore, I can't remember a
> time when __acquires/__releases notation caught anything that lockdep
> couldn't trivially and can't even think of a way how it could. AFAICS, these
> annotations don't contribute anything other than preservation of themselves.
> I don't see why we would want to keep them.
People have noticed it. It just hasn't been a priority as there are
lots of even more problematic things.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-10 6:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-05 21:24 [PATCHSET v2 block/for-next] blkcg: Improve blkg config helpers and make iolatency init lazy Tejun Heo
2023-01-05 21:24 ` [PATCH 1/4] blkcg: Drop unnecessary RCU read [un]locks from blkg_conf_prep/finish() Tejun Heo
2023-01-08 17:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-01-09 20:48 ` Tejun Heo
2023-01-10 6:49 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2023-01-10 18:24 ` Tejun Heo
2023-01-05 21:24 ` [PATCH 2/4] blkcg: Restructure blkg_conf_prep() and friends Tejun Heo
2023-01-10 7:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-01-10 18:33 ` Tejun Heo
2023-01-05 21:24 ` [PATCH 3/4] blk-iolatency: s/blkcg_rq_qos/iolat_rq_qos/ Tejun Heo
2023-01-10 7:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-01-05 21:24 ` [PATCH 4/4] blk-iolatency: Make initialization lazy Tejun Heo
2023-01-10 7:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-04-13 0:06 [PATCHSET v4 block/for-next] blkcg: Improve blkg config helpers and make iolatency init lazy Tejun Heo
2023-04-13 0:06 ` [PATCH 1/4] blkcg: Drop unnecessary RCU read [un]locks from blkg_conf_prep/finish() Tejun Heo
2023-04-13 4:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-01-10 22:27 [PATCHSET v3 block/for-next] blkcg: Improve blkg config helpers and make iolatency init lazy Tejun Heo
2023-01-10 22:27 ` [PATCH 1/4] blkcg: Drop unnecessary RCU read [un]locks from blkg_conf_prep/finish() Tejun Heo
2023-01-05 0:20 [PATCHSET block/for-next] blkcg: Improve blkg config helpers and make iolatency init lazy Tejun Heo
2023-01-05 0:20 ` [PATCH 1/4] blkcg: Drop unnecessary RCU read [un]locks from blkg_conf_prep/finish() Tejun Heo
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=20230110064900.GA10277@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).