On 14/03/2018 4:08 PM, Lidong Zhong wrote: > I don't think it could cause any lock contention without this fix. > But as the comment said, it could bring optimisation when the array > is in frozen state. > > Signed-off-by: Lidong Zhong <lzhong@xxxxxxxx> > Fix: 824e47daddbf(RAID1: avoid unnecessary spin locks in I/O barrier code) > --- > drivers/md/raid1.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/md/raid1.c b/drivers/md/raid1.c > index fe872dc6712e..3d7edffaf85b 100644 > --- a/drivers/md/raid1.c > +++ b/drivers/md/raid1.c > @@ -935,7 +935,7 @@ static void _wait_barrier(struct r1conf *conf, int idx) > * or be queued, no race will happen. See code comment in > * frozen_array(). > */ > - if (!READ_ONCE(conf->array_frozen) && > + if (READ_ONCE(conf->array_frozen) && > !atomic_read(&conf->barrier[idx])) > return; Hi Lidong, How do you think your change fixes a bug ? ^_^ Coly Li -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
