[PATCH 2/6] bfq: Drop pointless unlock-lock pair

From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	"yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: [PATCH 2/6] bfq: Drop pointless unlock-lock pair
Date: Mon,  6 Jun 2022 19:56:37 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220606175655.8993-2-jack@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220606174118.10992-1-jack@suse.cz>

commit fc84e1f941b91221092da5b3102ec82da24c5673 upstream.

In bfq_insert_request() we unlock bfqd->lock only to call
trace_block_rq_insert() and then lock bfqd->lock again. This is really
pointless since tracing is disabled if we really care about performance
and even if the tracepoint is enabled, it is a quick call.

CC: stable@vger.kernel.org
Tested-by: "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220401102752.8599-5-jack@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
---
 block/bfq-iosched.c | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
index e14f421282dd..bad088103279 100644
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
@@ -5537,11 +5537,8 @@ static void bfq_insert_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, struct request *rq,
 		return;
 	}
 
-	spin_unlock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
-
 	blk_mq_sched_request_inserted(rq);
 
-	spin_lock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
 	bfqq = bfq_init_rq(rq);
 	if (!bfqq || at_head || blk_rq_is_passthrough(rq)) {
 		if (at_head)
-- 
2.35.3

