On Thu 09-01-25 09:32:08, Yu Kuai wrote: > Hi, > > 在 2025/01/08 22:42, Jan Kara 写道: > > > > > > > */ > > > if (bfqq_process_refs(waker_bfqq) == 1) > > > return NULL; > > > - break; > > > + > > > + return waker_bfqq; > > > > So how do you know bfqq_process_refs(waker_bfqq) is not 0 in this case? > > Because in this case, waker_bfqq is in the merge chain of bfqq, and bfqq > is obtained frm the current process, which means waker_bfqq should have > at least one process reference that is from current thread. Ah, right. Thanks for explanation. The except for the typo the patch looks good to me. Feel free to add: Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> (although I can see Jens has already picked up the patch so probably this is immaterial). Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR
