block/bfq-cgroup.c | 4 +--- block/bfq-iosched.h | 2 -- 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)
From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
After commit dfd6200a0954 ("blk-cgroup: support to track if policy is
online"), there is no need to do this again in bfq.
Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
---
block/bfq-cgroup.c | 4 +---
block/bfq-iosched.h | 2 --
2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/bfq-cgroup.c b/block/bfq-cgroup.c
index b42956ab5550..a35136dae713 100644
--- a/block/bfq-cgroup.c
+++ b/block/bfq-cgroup.c
@@ -551,7 +551,6 @@ static void bfq_pd_init(struct blkg_policy_data *pd)
bfqg->bfqd = bfqd;
bfqg->active_entities = 0;
bfqg->num_queues_with_pending_reqs = 0;
- bfqg->online = true;
bfqg->rq_pos_tree = RB_ROOT;
}
@@ -614,7 +613,7 @@ struct bfq_group *bfq_bio_bfqg(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bio *bio)
continue;
}
bfqg = blkg_to_bfqg(blkg);
- if (bfqg->online) {
+ if (bfqg->pd.online) {
bio_associate_blkg_from_css(bio, &blkg->blkcg->css);
return bfqg;
}
@@ -985,7 +984,6 @@ static void bfq_pd_offline(struct blkg_policy_data *pd)
put_async_queues:
bfq_put_async_queues(bfqd, bfqg);
- bfqg->online = false;
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bfqd->lock, flags);
/*
diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.h b/block/bfq-iosched.h
index 75cc6a324267..69aaee52285a 100644
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.h
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.h
@@ -1009,8 +1009,6 @@ struct bfq_group {
/* reference counter (see comments in bfq_bic_update_cgroup) */
refcount_t ref;
- /* Is bfq_group still online? */
- bool online;
struct bfq_entity entity;
struct bfq_sched_data sched_data;
--
2.31.1
On Wed 01-02-23 20:06:09, Yu Kuai wrote: > From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> > > After commit dfd6200a0954 ("blk-cgroup: support to track if policy is > online"), there is no need to do this again in bfq. > > Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> So I agree this is nice to do but it isn't so simple. BFQ relies on the fact that 'online' is cleared under bfqd->lock so we cannot associate bio in bfq_bio_bfqg() with a bfqg that has already its bfq_pd_offline() function run. Maybe if you set 'online' to false before calling ->pd_offline() things would work fine for BFQ. Honza > --- > block/bfq-cgroup.c | 4 +--- > block/bfq-iosched.h | 2 -- > 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/block/bfq-cgroup.c b/block/bfq-cgroup.c > index b42956ab5550..a35136dae713 100644 > --- a/block/bfq-cgroup.c > +++ b/block/bfq-cgroup.c > @@ -551,7 +551,6 @@ static void bfq_pd_init(struct blkg_policy_data *pd) > bfqg->bfqd = bfqd; > bfqg->active_entities = 0; > bfqg->num_queues_with_pending_reqs = 0; > - bfqg->online = true; > bfqg->rq_pos_tree = RB_ROOT; > } > > @@ -614,7 +613,7 @@ struct bfq_group *bfq_bio_bfqg(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bio *bio) > continue; > } > bfqg = blkg_to_bfqg(blkg); > - if (bfqg->online) { > + if (bfqg->pd.online) { > bio_associate_blkg_from_css(bio, &blkg->blkcg->css); > return bfqg; > } > @@ -985,7 +984,6 @@ static void bfq_pd_offline(struct blkg_policy_data *pd) > > put_async_queues: > bfq_put_async_queues(bfqd, bfqg); > - bfqg->online = false; > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bfqd->lock, flags); > /* > diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.h b/block/bfq-iosched.h > index 75cc6a324267..69aaee52285a 100644 > --- a/block/bfq-iosched.h > +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.h > @@ -1009,8 +1009,6 @@ struct bfq_group { > > /* reference counter (see comments in bfq_bic_update_cgroup) */ > refcount_t ref; > - /* Is bfq_group still online? */ > - bool online; > > struct bfq_entity entity; > struct bfq_sched_data sched_data; > -- > 2.31.1 > -- Jan Kara <jack@suse.com> SUSE Labs, CR
Hi, Jan! 在 2023/02/01 21:10, Jan Kara 写道: > On Wed 01-02-23 20:06:09, Yu Kuai wrote: >> From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> >> >> After commit dfd6200a0954 ("blk-cgroup: support to track if policy is >> online"), there is no need to do this again in bfq. >> >> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> > > So I agree this is nice to do but it isn't so simple. BFQ relies on the > fact that 'online' is cleared under bfqd->lock so we cannot associate bio > in bfq_bio_bfqg() with a bfqg that has already its bfq_pd_offline() > function run. > > Maybe if you set 'online' to false before calling ->pd_offline() things > would work fine for BFQ. Yes, you're right. Thanks for the explanation. Kuai
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.