Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 15 Jan 2012 23:22:26 -0800 | From | Tejun Heo <> | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] Block IO bits for 3.3-rc |
| |
Hello,
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 12:33:20PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote: > > See below for the initial 3.3-rc1 git pull request in the block IO area. > > Not too much queued up for this round, mostly some code churn to improve > > some of the existing functionality. > > > > It has the following changes: > > > > - The big io context cleanup from Tejun. > > Ok. This got some conflicts that I think I got right, but I'd really > like Tejun to check it out. There were changes mainly to things he had > removed, and I think all the changes were made irrelevant by his > cleanups, but...
In cfq-iosched.c, there were the following three mainline commits which weren't in the block branch.
- 2984ff38cc "cfq-iosched: free cic_index if blkio_alloc_blkg_stats fails"
This fixes cic->cic_index freeing in alloc failure path. cic_index got moved to q->id which is allocated in blk_alloc_queue_node() and properly freed after any failure. This doesn't cause any conflict per-se but causes compiler failure as cic_index no longer exists. Changes made by this patch should be removed.
- 5eb46851de "cfq-iosched: fix cfq_cic_link() race confition"
This fixes install race handling in unlock-alloc-lock-install sequence. The logic got moved to ioc_create_icq() which already deals with it properly. Ignoring conflict and removing the conflicted part from mainline should do.
- 6ae0516b8a "block, cfq: fix empty queue crash caused by request merge"
The same commit existed in block as 4a0b75c7d0. Nothing to do.
In blk-ioc.c, the following commit.
- bb9d97b6df "cgroup: don't use subsys->can_attach_task() or ->attach_task()"
It conflicts with three block commits updating how ioc is obtained and the changed flag is set. Putting the updated per-task logic from block inside cgroup_taskset_for_each() loop is the correct resolution.
So, yeap, my merge matches yours exactly and everything looks good to me.
Thanks.
-- tejun
| |