Re: question about blk_schedule_flush_plug

From: Mike Galbraith
Date: Mon May 23 2011 - 03:47:19 EST

On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 17:05 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> I was looking at the scheduler changes going into 2.6.39 again and wondered
> about the use of blk_schedule_flush_plug smack in the middle of schedule()
> It looks like this:
> if (blk_needs_flush_plug(prev)) {
> raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock);
> blk_schedule_flush_plug(prev);
> raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock);
> }
> Now call me suspicious but to my eyes it looks really dubious unlocking the
> runqueue like that right in the heart of schedule().
> Comments?

Releasing/retaking rq->lock is nothing new:

static void idle_balance(int this_cpu, struct rq *this_rq)
* Drop the rq->lock, but keep IRQ/preempt disabled.

See also need_resched, and double_lock_balance() instances.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at