From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] block: move the bdi from the request_queue to the gendisk
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2021 17:47:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210809154728.GH30319@quack2.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210809141744.1203023-5-hch@lst.de>
On Mon 09-08-21 16:17:43, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> The backing device information only makes sense for file system I/O,
> and thus belongs into the gendisk and not the lower level request_queue
> structure. Move it there.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Looks mostly good. I'm just unsure whether some queue_to_disk() calls are
safe.
> diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
> index 2c4ac51e54eb..d2725f94491d 100644
> --- a/block/blk-mq.c
> +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
> @@ -525,7 +525,7 @@ void blk_mq_free_request(struct request *rq)
> __blk_mq_dec_active_requests(hctx);
>
> if (unlikely(laptop_mode && !blk_rq_is_passthrough(rq)))
> - laptop_io_completion(q->backing_dev_info);
> + laptop_io_completion(queue_to_disk(q)->bdi);
>
E.g. cannot this get called for a queue that is without a disk?
> diff --git a/block/blk-wbt.c b/block/blk-wbt.c
> index 3ed71b8da887..31086afaad9c 100644
> --- a/block/blk-wbt.c
> +++ b/block/blk-wbt.c
> @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ static void wb_timestamp(struct rq_wb *rwb, unsigned long *var)
> */
> static bool wb_recent_wait(struct rq_wb *rwb)
> {
> - struct bdi_writeback *wb = &rwb->rqos.q->backing_dev_info->wb;
> + struct bdi_writeback *wb = &queue_to_disk(rwb->rqos.q)->bdi->wb;
>
> return time_before(jiffies, wb->dirty_sleep + HZ);
> }
> @@ -234,7 +234,7 @@ enum {
>
> static int latency_exceeded(struct rq_wb *rwb, struct blk_rq_stat *stat)
> {
> - struct backing_dev_info *bdi = rwb->rqos.q->backing_dev_info;
> + struct backing_dev_info *bdi = queue_to_disk(rwb->rqos.q)->bdi;
> struct rq_depth *rqd = &rwb->rq_depth;
> u64 thislat;
>
> @@ -287,7 +287,7 @@ static int latency_exceeded(struct rq_wb *rwb, struct blk_rq_stat *stat)
>
> static void rwb_trace_step(struct rq_wb *rwb, const char *msg)
> {
> - struct backing_dev_info *bdi = rwb->rqos.q->backing_dev_info;
> + struct backing_dev_info *bdi = queue_to_disk(rwb->rqos.q)->bdi;
> struct rq_depth *rqd = &rwb->rq_depth;
>
> trace_wbt_step(bdi, msg, rqd->scale_step, rwb->cur_win_nsec,
> @@ -359,8 +359,8 @@ static void wb_timer_fn(struct blk_stat_callback *cb)
>
> status = latency_exceeded(rwb, cb->stat);
>
> - trace_wbt_timer(rwb->rqos.q->backing_dev_info, status, rqd->scale_step,
> - inflight);
> + trace_wbt_timer(queue_to_disk(rwb->rqos.q)->bdi, status,
> + rqd->scale_step, inflight);
>
> /*
> * If we exceeded the latency target, step down. If we did not,
Or all these calls - is wbt guaranteed to only be setup for a queue with
disk?
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-09 15:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-09 14:17 Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-09 14:17 ` [PATCH 1/5] mm: hide laptop_mode_wb_timer entirely behind the BDI API Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-09 14:33 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2021-08-09 15:10 ` Jan Kara
2021-08-10 21:56 ` Guenter Roeck
2021-08-11 5:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-09 14:17 ` [PATCH 2/5] block: pass a gendisk to blk_queue_update_readahead Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-09 14:35 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2021-08-09 15:17 ` Jan Kara
2021-08-09 14:17 ` [PATCH 3/5] block: add a queue_has_disk helper Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-09 14:37 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2021-08-09 15:18 ` Jan Kara
2021-08-09 14:17 ` [PATCH 4/5] block: move the bdi from the request_queue to the gendisk Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-09 14:38 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2021-08-09 15:47 ` Jan Kara [this message]
2021-08-09 17:57 ` Jens Axboe
2021-08-09 21:29 ` Jan Kara
2021-08-10 16:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-10-14 14:31 ` [sparc64] kernel OOPS (was: [PATCH 4/5] block: move the bdi from the request_queue to the gendisk) Anatoly Pugachev
2021-10-14 14:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-10-14 20:27 ` Anatoly Pugachev
2021-08-09 14:17 ` [PATCH 5/5] block: remove the bd_bdi in struct block_device Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-09 14:55 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2021-08-09 15:49 ` Jan Kara
2021-08-09 21:42 ` move the bdi from the request_queue to the gendisk Jens Axboe
2021-08-10 19:36 ` Qian Cai
2021-08-10 20:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-11 2:28 ` Qian Cai
2021-08-11 11:25 ` Jan Kara
2021-08-11 11:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-11 12:47 ` Jan Kara
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210809154728.GH30319@quack2.suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox