On 02/01/2017 04:56 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>> +/*
>> + * add rq to rbtree and fifo
>> + */
>> +static void dd_insert_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, struct request *rq,
>> + bool at_head)
>> +{
>> + struct request_queue *q = hctx->queue;
>> + struct deadline_data *dd = q->elevator->elevator_data;
>> + const int data_dir = rq_data_dir(rq);
>> +
>> + if (blk_mq_sched_try_insert_merge(q, rq))
>> + return;
>> +
>
> A related doubt: shouldn't blk_mq_sched_try_insert_merge be invoked
> with the scheduler lock held too, as blk_mq_sched_try_merge, to
> protect (at least) q->last_merge?
>
> In bfq this function is invoked with the lock held.
It doesn't matter which lock you use, as long as:
1) You use the same one consistently
2) It has the same scope as the queue lock (the one you call the
scheduler lock)
mq-deadline sets up a per-queue structure, deadline_data, and it has a
lock embedded in that structure. This is what mq-deadline uses to
serialize access to its data structures, as well as those in the queue
(like last_merge).
--
Jens Axboe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
