md/raid5: make use of spin_lock_irq over local_irq_disable + spin_lock
On mainline, there is no functional difference, just less code, and symmetric lock/unlock paths. On PREEMPT_RT builds, this fixes the following warning, seen by Alexander GQ Gerasiov, due to the sleeping nature of spinlocks. BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/rtmutex.c:993 in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 1, pid: 58, name: kworker/u12:1 CPU: 5 PID: 58 Comm: kworker/u12:1 Tainted: G W 4.9.20-rt16-stand6-686 #1 Hardware name: Supermicro SYS-5027R-WRF/X9SRW-F, BIOS 3.2a 10/28/2015 Workqueue: writeback wb_workfn (flush-253:0) Call Trace: dump_stack+0x47/0x68 ? migrate_enable+0x4a/0xf0 ___might_sleep+0x101/0x180 rt_spin_lock+0x17/0x40 add_stripe_bio+0x4e3/0x6c0 [raid456] ? preempt_count_add+0x42/0xb0 raid5_make_request+0x737/0xdd0 [raid456] Reported-by: Alexander GQ Gerasiov <gq@redlab-i.ru> Tested-by: Alexander GQ Gerasiov <gq@redlab-i.ru> Signed-off-by: Julia Cartwright <julia@ni.com> Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
4ac4d58488
commit
3d05f3aed5
|
@ -103,8 +103,7 @@ static inline void unlock_device_hash_lock(struct r5conf *conf, int hash)
|
|||
static inline void lock_all_device_hash_locks_irq(struct r5conf *conf)
|
||||
{
|
||||
int i;
|
||||
local_irq_disable();
|
||||
spin_lock(conf->hash_locks);
|
||||
spin_lock_irq(conf->hash_locks);
|
||||
for (i = 1; i < NR_STRIPE_HASH_LOCKS; i++)
|
||||
spin_lock_nest_lock(conf->hash_locks + i, conf->hash_locks);
|
||||
spin_lock(&conf->device_lock);
|
||||
|
@ -114,9 +113,9 @@ static inline void unlock_all_device_hash_locks_irq(struct r5conf *conf)
|
|||
{
|
||||
int i;
|
||||
spin_unlock(&conf->device_lock);
|
||||
for (i = NR_STRIPE_HASH_LOCKS; i; i--)
|
||||
spin_unlock(conf->hash_locks + i - 1);
|
||||
local_irq_enable();
|
||||
for (i = NR_STRIPE_HASH_LOCKS - 1; i; i--)
|
||||
spin_unlock(conf->hash_locks + i);
|
||||
spin_unlock_irq(conf->hash_locks);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/* Find first data disk in a raid6 stripe */
|
||||
|
@ -714,12 +713,11 @@ static bool is_full_stripe_write(struct stripe_head *sh)
|
|||
|
||||
static void lock_two_stripes(struct stripe_head *sh1, struct stripe_head *sh2)
|
||||
{
|
||||
local_irq_disable();
|
||||
if (sh1 > sh2) {
|
||||
spin_lock(&sh2->stripe_lock);
|
||||
spin_lock_irq(&sh2->stripe_lock);
|
||||
spin_lock_nested(&sh1->stripe_lock, 1);
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
spin_lock(&sh1->stripe_lock);
|
||||
spin_lock_irq(&sh1->stripe_lock);
|
||||
spin_lock_nested(&sh2->stripe_lock, 1);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
@ -727,8 +725,7 @@ static void lock_two_stripes(struct stripe_head *sh1, struct stripe_head *sh2)
|
|||
static void unlock_two_stripes(struct stripe_head *sh1, struct stripe_head *sh2)
|
||||
{
|
||||
spin_unlock(&sh1->stripe_lock);
|
||||
spin_unlock(&sh2->stripe_lock);
|
||||
local_irq_enable();
|
||||
spin_unlock_irq(&sh2->stripe_lock);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/* Only freshly new full stripe normal write stripe can be added to a batch list */
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue