public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Blaisorblade <blaisorblade@yahoo.it>
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, jdike@addtoit.com,
	user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/11] uml ubd driver: ubd_io_lock usage fixup
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 09:26:48 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061030082643.GM4563@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200610292023.12980.blaisorblade@yahoo.it>

On Sun, Oct 29 2006, Blaisorblade wrote:
> Add some comments about requirements for ubd_io_lock and expand its use.
> 
> When an irq signals that the "controller" (i.e. another thread on the host,
> which does the actual requests and is the only one blocked on I/O on the
>  host) has done some work, we call again the request function ourselves
> (do_ubd_request).
> 
> We now do that with ubd_io_lock held - that's useful to protect against
> concurrent calls to elv_next_request and so on.

Not only useful, required, as I think I complained about a year or more
ago :-)

> XXX: Maybe we shouldn't call at all the request function. Input needed on
>  this. Are we supposed to plug and unplug the queue? That code "indirectly"
>  does that by setting a flag, called do_ubd, which makes the request function
>  return (it's a residual of 2.4 block layer interface).

Sometimes you need to. I'd probably just remove the do_ubd check and
always recall the request function when handling completions, it's
easier and safe.

-- 
Jens Axboe


       reply	other threads:[~2006-10-30  8:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <200610292023.12980.blaisorblade@yahoo.it>
2006-10-30  8:26 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2006-10-29 19:17 [PATCH 00/11] UBD driver little cleanups for 2.6.19 Paolo 'Blaisorblade' Giarrusso
2006-10-29 19:20 ` [PATCH 06/11] uml ubd driver: ubd_io_lock usage fixup Paolo 'Blaisorblade' Giarrusso

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=20061030082643.GM4563@kernel.dk \
    --to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=blaisorblade@yahoo.it \
    --cc=jdike@addtoit.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /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