在 2021/12/10 18:00, Paolo Valente 写道:
Il giorno 27 nov 2021, alle ore 11:11, Yu Kuai <yukuai3@xxxxxxxxxx> ha scritto:
Prepare to decrease 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs' earlier.
Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
block/bfq-iosched.c | 13 +++++--------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
index e3c31db4bffb..4239b3996e23 100644
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
@@ -882,6 +882,10 @@ void bfq_weights_tree_remove(struct bfq_data *bfqd,
{
struct bfq_entity *entity = bfqq->entity.parent;
+ bfqq->ref++;
+ __bfq_weights_tree_remove(bfqd, bfqq,
+ &bfqd->queue_weights_tree);
+
for_each_entity(entity) {
struct bfq_sched_data *sd = entity->my_sched_data;
@@ -916,14 +920,7 @@ void bfq_weights_tree_remove(struct bfq_data *bfqd,
}
}
- /*
- * Next function is invoked last, because it causes bfqq to be
- * freed if the following holds: bfqq is not in service and
- * has no dispatched request. DO NOT use bfqq after the next
- * function invocation.
- */
- __bfq_weights_tree_remove(bfqd, bfqq,
- &bfqd->queue_weights_tree);
+ bfq_put_queue(bfqq);
}
why it is not dangerous any longer to invoke __bfq_weights_tree_remove earlier, and the comment can be removed?
Hi, Paolo
Here I grab an additional ref to the bfqq, thus the bfqq is ensured not
to be free before bfq_put_queue() at the end of the function.
Maybe some comments is more appropriate.
Thanks,
Kuai
Paolo
/*
--
2.31.1
.
