linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>, <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	<ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: <yi.zhang@huawei.com>, <zhangxiaoxu5@huawei.com>,
	<luoshijie1@huawei.com>, <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: rename 'q->debugfs_dir' in blk_unregister_queue()
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 12:20:50 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <18bf436a-9c6a-dba8-46a4-ef57132f467a@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c57b050d-9ed7-9d6b-b1d0-628a197f6ea6@acm.org>

On 2020/2/12 11:27, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> What is the behavior of this loop if multiple block devices are being
> removed concurrently? Does it perhaps change remove block device removal
> from an O(1) into an O(n) operation?
Yes, there may be performance overhead.(I thought it's minimal) However,
I can change the name of dir form "read_to_remove_%d" to
"read_to_remove_%s(dev_name)_%d" to fix that.
> 
> Since this scenario may only matter to syzbot tests: has it been
> considered to delay block device creation if the debugfs directory from
> a previous incarnation of the block device still exists?
> 
I think it's a bug device creation succeed when the debugfs directory
exist. Of course delay block device creation can fix the problem, but I
haven't come up with a good solution. And by renaming the dir, there is
no need to delay cration.

Thanks!
Yu Kuai


  reply	other threads:[~2020-02-12  4:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-02-11  3:51 [PATCH] block: rename 'q->debugfs_dir' in blk_unregister_queue() yu kuai
2020-02-12  3:27 ` Bart Van Assche
2020-02-12  4:20   ` yukuai (C) [this message]
2020-02-13  4:38 ` kbuild test robot
2020-02-13 11:39 ` kbuild test robot

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=18bf436a-9c6a-dba8-46a4-ef57132f467a@huawei.com \
    --to=yukuai3@huawei.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luoshijie1@huawei.com \
    --cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
    --cc=zhangxiaoxu5@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).