Re: [PATCH v5 0/4] Charge loop device i/o to issuing cgroup

[Dan Schatzberg]

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 06:35:45AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 09:25:21AM -0400, Dan Schatzberg wrote:
> > Seems like discussion on this patch series has died down. There's been
> > a concern raised that we could generalize infrastructure across loop,
> > md, etc. This may be possible, in the future, but it isn't clear to me
> > how this would look like. I'm inclined to fix the existing issue with
> > loop devices now (this is a problem we hit at FB) and address
> > consolidation with other cases if and when those are addressed.
> > 
> > Jens, you've expressed interest in seeing this series go through the
> > block tree so I'm interested in your perspective here. Barring any
> > concrete implementation bugs, would you be okay merging this version?
> 
> Independ of any higher level issues you need to sort out the spinlock
> mess I pointed out.

Will do - I'll split out the lock-use refactor into a separate
patch. Do you have particular concerns about re-using the existing
spinlock? Its existing use is not contended so I didn't see any harm
in extending its use. I'll add this justification to the commit
message as well, but I'm tempted to leave the re-use as is instead of
creating a new lock.