lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jun]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    Patch in this message
    /
    From
    Subject[PATCH 5.17 631/772] bfq: Drop pointless unlock-lock pair
    Date
    From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>

    commit fc84e1f941b91221092da5b3102ec82da24c5673 upstream.

    In bfq_insert_request() we unlock bfqd->lock only to call
    trace_block_rq_insert() and then lock bfqd->lock again. This is really
    pointless since tracing is disabled if we really care about performance
    and even if the tracepoint is enabled, it is a quick call.

    CC: stable@vger.kernel.org
    Tested-by: "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
    Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
    Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
    Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220401102752.8599-5-jack@suse.cz
    Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
    Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
    ---
    block/bfq-iosched.c | 3 ---
    1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

    --- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
    +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
    @@ -6154,11 +6154,8 @@ static void bfq_insert_request(struct bl
    return;
    }

    - spin_unlock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
    -
    trace_block_rq_insert(rq);

    - spin_lock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
    bfqq = bfq_init_rq(rq);
    if (!bfqq || at_head) {
    if (at_head)

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2022-06-07 23:39    [W:4.025 / U:0.104 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site