On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 08:47:17AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > As far as I can tell we do not need the freeze at all for given that
> > by the time release is called I/O is quiesced.
>
> Why? lo_release() is called when close() is called. But (periodically-scheduled
> or triggered-on-demand) writeback of previously executed buffered write() calls
> can start while lo_release() or __loop_clr_fd() is running. Then, why not to
> wait for I/O requests to complete?
Let's refine my wording, the above should be "... by the time the final
lo_release is called". blkdev_put_whole ensures all writeback has finished
and all buffers are gone by writing all data back and waiting for it and then
truncating the pages from blkdev_flush_mapping.
> Isn't that the reason of
>
> } else if (lo->lo_state == Lo_bound) {
> /*
> * Otherwise keep thread (if running) and config,
> * but flush possible ongoing bios in thread.
> */
> blk_mq_freeze_queue(lo->lo_queue);
> blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(lo->lo_queue);
> }
>
> path in lo_release() being there?
This looks completely spurious to me. Adding Ming who added it.
