On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> + if (!blkcg_policy_enabled(q, pol)) {
>> + ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> + goto fail;
>
> Pulling this out of the queue_lock doesn't seem safe to me. This
> function may end up calling into callbacks of disabled policies this
> way.
I will move this to within the lock. To make things safe, I am also
thinking of rechecking both blkcg_policy_enabled() and
blk_queue_bypass() after reacquiring the locks in each iteration.
>> + parent = blkcg_parent(blkcg);
>> + while (parent && !__blkg_lookup(parent, q, false)) {
>> + pos = parent;
>> + parent = blkcg_parent(parent);
>> + }
>
> Hmm... how about adding @new_blkg to blkg_lookup_create() and calling
> it with non-NULL @new_blkg until it succeeds? Wouldn't that be
> simpler?
>
>> +
>> + new_blkg = blkg_alloc(pos, q, GFP_KERNEL);
The challenge with that approach is creating a new_blkg with the right
blkcg before passing to blkg_lookup_create(). blkg_lookup_create()
walks down the hierarchy and will try to fill the first missing entry
and the preallocated new_blkg must have been created with the right
blkcg (feel free to send a code fragment if you think I am
misunderstanding the suggestion).
