On Tue, 18 Mar 2025, Jens Axboe wrote: > > Yeah, it looks fine, but I feel it is still fragile, and not sure it is one > > accepted solution. > > Agree - it'd be much better to have the bio drivers provide the same > guarantees that we get on the request side, rather than play games with > this and pretend that concurrent update and usage is fine. > > -- > Jens Axboe And what mechanism should they use to read the queue limits? * locking? (would degrade performance) * percpu-rwsem? (no overhead for readers, writers wait for the RCU synchronization) * RCU? * anything else? Mikulas
- [PATC] block: update queue limits atomically Mikulas Patocka
- Re: [PATC] block: update queue limits atomically Bart Van Assche
- Re: [PATC] block: update queue limits atomicall... Mikulas Patocka
- Re: [PATC] block: update queue limits atomically Ming Lei
- Re: [PATC] block: update queue limits atomicall... Mikulas Patocka
- Re: [PATC] block: update queue limits atomi... Ming Lei
- Re: [PATC] block: update queue limits a... Jens Axboe
- Re: [PATC] block: update queue lim... Mikulas Patocka
- Re: [PATC] block: update queue... Ming Lei
- Re: [PATC] block: update q... Jens Axboe
- Re: [PATC] block: update queue lim... Christoph Hellwig
- Re: [PATC] block: update queue limits atomically Christoph Hellwig