From 79dca1846fe979304ad0b998e56b20326e2e5a72 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Hao Xu <haoxu@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 20:55:54 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] io-wq: move nr_running and worker_refs out of wqe->lock
protection
We don't need to protect nr_running and worker_refs by wqe->lock, so
narrow the range of raw_spin_lock_irq - raw_spin_unlock_irq
Signed-off-by: Hao Xu <haoxu@linux.alibaba.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210810125554.99229-1-haoxu@linux.alibaba.com
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
---
fs/io-wq.c | 7 ++++---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/io-wq.c b/fs/io-wq.c
index 4ce83bb480210..8da9bb1039168 100644
--- a/fs/io-wq.c
+++ b/fs/io-wq.c
@@ -256,16 +256,17 @@ static void io_wqe_wake_worker(struct io_wqe *wqe, struct io_wqe_acct *acct)
raw_spin_lock_irq(&wqe->lock);
if (acct->nr_workers < acct->max_workers) {
- atomic_inc(&acct->nr_running);
- atomic_inc(&wqe->wq->worker_refs);
if (!acct->nr_workers)
first = true;
acct->nr_workers++;
do_create = true;
}
raw_spin_unlock_irq(&wqe->lock);
- if (do_create)
+ if (do_create) {
+ atomic_inc(&acct->nr_running);
+ atomic_inc(&wqe->wq->worker_refs);
create_io_worker(wqe->wq, wqe, acct->index, first);
+ }
}
}
--
2.30.2