Re: [PATCH V3] block: Mitigate lock unbalance caused by lock switching

From: Tim Gardner
Date: Tue May 29 2012 - 09:46:27 EST


On 05/28/2012 07:39 PM, Asias He wrote:

<snip>

> @@ -440,6 +435,11 @@ void blk_cleanup_queue(struct request_queue *q)
> del_timer_sync(&q->backing_dev_info.laptop_mode_wb_timer);
> blk_sync_queue(q);
>
> + spin_lock_irq(lock);
> + if (q->queue_lock != &q->__queue_lock)
> + q->queue_lock = &q->__queue_lock;
> + spin_unlock_irq(lock);
> +

Isn't the 'if' clause superfluous ? You could just do the assignment, e.g.,

+ spin_lock_irq(lock);
+ q->queue_lock = &q->__queue_lock;
+ spin_unlock_irq(lock);

rtg
--
Tim Gardner tim.gardner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
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/