From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1423081AbbD2NfR (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2015 09:35:17 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:45829 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422850AbbD2NfO (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2015 09:35:14 -0400 Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 15:35:12 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: NeilBrown Cc: Mike Snitzer , Jens Axboe , Azat Khuzhin , Christoph Hellwig , "Kernel.org-Linux-RAID" , Guoqing Jiang , Tejun Heo , Jan Kara , lkml , device-mapper development , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH -stable] block: destroy bdi before blockdev is unregistered. Message-ID: <20150429133512.GA4436@lst.de> References: <20150414171537.GH25394@azat> <20150423160551.45345f96@notabene.brown> <20150427141222.5dac22f1@notabene.brown> <20150429072530.39d38b00@notabene.brown> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150429072530.39d38b00@notabene.brown> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 07:25:30AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > As bdi_set_min_ratio doesn't touch bdi->dev, there seems to be no need for > the test, or the warning. > > I wonder if it would make sense to move the bdi_set_min_ratio() call to > bdi_destroy, and discard bdi_unregister?? > There is a comment which suggests bdi_unregister might be of use later, but > it might be best to have a clean slate in which to add whatever might be > needed?? This seems fine to me from the block dev point of view. I don't really understand the bdi_min_ratio logic, but Peter might have a better idea.