On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 04:33:04PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 4/12/23 16:20, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 04:16:36PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> >>> } else {
> >>> + trace_block_rq_insert(rq);
> >>
> >> Shouldn't we keep the trace call under ctx->lock to preserve precise tracing ?
> >
> > ctx->lock doesn't synchronize any of the in the request that is traced
> > here.
>
> I am not worried about the values shown by the trace entries, but rather the
> order of the inserts: with the trace call outside the lock, the trace may end up
> showing an incorrect insertion order ?
Maybe. I can respin the series and move it back under the lock.
