> On Mar 10, 2017, at 8:46 PM, zhouchengming <zhouchengming1@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 2017/3/10 23:12, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> On 03/08/2017 07:20 PM, Zhou Chengming wrote: >>> When we activate policy on the request_queue, we will create policy_date >>> for all the existing blkgs of the request_queue, so we should call >>> pd_init_fn() and pd_online_fn() on these newly created policy_data. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Zhou Chengming<zhouchengming1@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> block/blk-cgroup.c | 6 ++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/block/blk-cgroup.c b/block/blk-cgroup.c >>> index 8ba0af7..0dd9e76 100644 >>> --- a/block/blk-cgroup.c >>> +++ b/block/blk-cgroup.c >>> @@ -1254,6 +1254,12 @@ int blkcg_activate_policy(struct request_queue *q, >>> pd->plid = pol->plid; >>> if (pol->pd_init_fn) >>> pol->pd_init_fn(pd); >>> + >>> + if (pol->pd_online_fn) { >>> + spin_lock(blkg->blkcg->lock); >>> + pol->pd_online_fn(pd); >>> + spin_unlock(blkg->blkcg->lock); >>> + } >> >> You didn't even compile this, did you? >> > > Sorry for my carelessness. It's a very minor change, so I didn't compile... > I will send a patch-v3 that I have compiled. Sorry again.. I don't care how trivial it seems. You always ALWAYS compile and test. Always. Don't ever send untested patches again, and not even compiling is unforgivable.