Commit bb7e5a19 authored by Yu Kuai's avatar Yu Kuai Committed by Jens Axboe

block, bfq: remove blkg_path()

After commit 35fe6d76 ("block: use standard blktrace API to output
cgroup info for debug notes"), the field 'bfqg->blkg_path' is not used
and hence can be removed, and therefor blkg_path() is not used anymore
and can be removed.
Signed-off-by: default avatarYu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarJan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240618032753.3502528-1-yukuai1@huaweicloud.comSigned-off-by: default avatarJens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
parent b83bd486
......@@ -797,57 +797,6 @@ void bfq_bic_update_cgroup(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, struct bio *bio)
*/
bfq_link_bfqg(bfqd, bfqg);
__bfq_bic_change_cgroup(bfqd, bic, bfqg);
/*
* Update blkg_path for bfq_log_* functions. We cache this
* path, and update it here, for the following
* reasons. Operations on blkg objects in blk-cgroup are
* protected with the request_queue lock, and not with the
* lock that protects the instances of this scheduler
* (bfqd->lock). This exposes BFQ to the following sort of
* race.
*
* The blkg_lookup performed in bfq_get_queue, protected
* through rcu, may happen to return the address of a copy of
* the original blkg. If this is the case, then the
* bfqg_and_blkg_get performed in bfq_get_queue, to pin down
* the blkg, is useless: it does not prevent blk-cgroup code
* from destroying both the original blkg and all objects
* directly or indirectly referred by the copy of the
* blkg.
*
* On the bright side, destroy operations on a blkg invoke, as
* a first step, hooks of the scheduler associated with the
* blkg. And these hooks are executed with bfqd->lock held for
* BFQ. As a consequence, for any blkg associated with the
* request queue this instance of the scheduler is attached
* to, we are guaranteed that such a blkg is not destroyed, and
* that all the pointers it contains are consistent, while we
* are holding bfqd->lock. A blkg_lookup performed with
* bfqd->lock held then returns a fully consistent blkg, which
* remains consistent until this lock is held.
*
* Thanks to the last fact, and to the fact that: (1) bfqg has
* been obtained through a blkg_lookup in the above
* assignment, and (2) bfqd->lock is being held, here we can
* safely use the policy data for the involved blkg (i.e., the
* field bfqg->pd) to get to the blkg associated with bfqg,
* and then we can safely use any field of blkg. After we
* release bfqd->lock, even just getting blkg through this
* bfqg may cause dangling references to be traversed, as
* bfqg->pd may not exist any more.
*
* In view of the above facts, here we cache, in the bfqg, any
* blkg data we may need for this bic, and for its associated
* bfq_queue. As of now, we need to cache only the path of the
* blkg, which is used in the bfq_log_* functions.
*
* Finally, note that bfqg itself needs to be protected from
* destruction on the blkg_free of the original blkg (which
* invokes bfq_pd_free). We use an additional private
* refcounter for bfqg, to let it disappear only after no
* bfq_queue refers to it any longer.
*/
blkg_path(bfqg_to_blkg(bfqg), bfqg->blkg_path, sizeof(bfqg->blkg_path));
bic->blkcg_serial_nr = serial_nr;
}
......
......@@ -1003,9 +1003,6 @@ struct bfq_group {
/* must be the first member */
struct blkg_policy_data pd;
/* cached path for this blkg (see comments in bfq_bic_update_cgroup) */
char blkg_path[128];
/* reference counter (see comments in bfq_bic_update_cgroup) */
refcount_t ref;
......
......@@ -300,19 +300,6 @@ static inline struct blkcg *cpd_to_blkcg(struct blkcg_policy_data *cpd)
return cpd ? cpd->blkcg : NULL;
}
/**
* blkg_path - format cgroup path of blkg
* @blkg: blkg of interest
* @buf: target buffer
* @buflen: target buffer length
*
* Format the path of the cgroup of @blkg into @buf.
*/
static inline int blkg_path(struct blkcg_gq *blkg, char *buf, int buflen)
{
return cgroup_path(blkg->blkcg->css.cgroup, buf, buflen);
}
/**
* blkg_get - get a blkg reference
* @blkg: blkg to get
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment