Hello, Jan. On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 04:37:00PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > The other thing which came to mind is that the congested->__bdi sever > > semantics. IIRC, that one was also to support the "bdi must go away now" > > behavior. As bdi is refcnted now, I think we can probably just let cong > > hold onto the bdi rather than try to sever the ref there. > > So currently I get away with __bdi not being a proper refcounted reference. > If we were to remove the clearing of __bdi, we'd have to make it into > refcounted reference which is sligthly ugly as we need to special-case > embedded bdi_writeback_congested structures. Maybe it will be a worthwhile > cleanup but for now I left it alone...
Yeah, absolutely, it's an additional step that we can take later. Nothing urgent. Thanks. -- tejun
