As described in the comment of blkcg_activate_policy(),
*Update of each blkg is protected by both queue and blkcg locks so
that holding either lock and testing blkcg_policy_enabled() is
always enough for dereferencing policy data.*
with queue lock held, there is no need to hold blkcg lock in
blkcg_deactivate_policy(). Similar case is in
blkcg_activate_policy(), which has removed holding of blkcg lock in
commit 4c55f4f9ad3001ac1fefdd8d8ca7641d18558e23.

Signed-off-by: Jiang Biao <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Wen Yang <[email protected]>
CC: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
CC: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
---
 block/blk-cgroup.c | 5 -----
 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/blk-cgroup.c b/block/blk-cgroup.c
index c2033a2..2b7f8d0 100644
--- a/block/blk-cgroup.c
+++ b/block/blk-cgroup.c
@@ -1367,17 +1367,12 @@ void blkcg_deactivate_policy(struct request_queue *q,
        __clear_bit(pol->plid, q->blkcg_pols);
 
        list_for_each_entry(blkg, &q->blkg_list, q_node) {
-               /* grab blkcg lock too while removing @pd from @blkg */
-               spin_lock(&blkg->blkcg->lock);
-
                if (blkg->pd[pol->plid]) {
                        if (pol->pd_offline_fn)
                                pol->pd_offline_fn(blkg->pd[pol->plid]);
                        pol->pd_free_fn(blkg->pd[pol->plid]);
                        blkg->pd[pol->plid] = NULL;
                }
-
-               spin_unlock(&blkg->blkcg->lock);
        }
 
        spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
-- 
2.7.4

Reply via email to