Re: [PATCH 4/6] block: add blk_queue_dead()

[Vivek Goyal]

On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 06:02:05PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> There are a number of QUEUE_FLAG_DEAD tests.  Add blk_queue_dead()
> macro and use it.
> 
> This patch doesn't introduce any functional difference.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  block/blk-core.c       |    6 +++---
>  block/blk-exec.c       |    2 +-
>  block/blk-sysfs.c      |    4 ++--
>  block/blk-throttle.c   |    4 ++--
>  block/blk.h            |    2 +-
>  include/linux/blkdev.h |    1 +
>  6 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
> index 1efb943..7d39897 100644
> --- a/block/blk-core.c
> +++ b/block/blk-core.c
> @@ -603,7 +603,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_init_allocated_queue_node);
>  
>  int blk_get_queue(struct request_queue *q)
>  {
> -	if (likely(!test_bit(QUEUE_FLAG_DEAD, &q->queue_flags))) {
> +	if (likely(!blk_queue_dead(q))) {
>  		kobject_get(&q->kobj);
>  		return 0;

I thought DEAD flag is now synchronized with queue lock. So the protocol
is that caller should be holding queue lock here first?

Thanks
Vivek
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/