From: Jens Axboe <ax...@kernel.dk> We need to do this inside the loop as well, or we can allow new IO to supersede previous IO.
Tested-by: Anchal Agarwal <ancha...@amazon.com> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <ax...@kernel.dk> https://jira.sw.ru/browse/PSBM-141883 (cherry picked from commit c45e6a037a536530bd25781ac7c989e52deb2a63) Signed-off-by: Pavel Tikhomirov <ptikhomi...@virtuozzo.com> --- block/blk-wbt.c | 9 ++++++--- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/block/blk-wbt.c b/block/blk-wbt.c index 26986435d969..97adb724df09 100644 --- a/block/blk-wbt.c +++ b/block/blk-wbt.c @@ -519,16 +519,17 @@ static void __wbt_wait(struct rq_wb *rwb, unsigned long rw, spinlock_t *lock) { struct rq_wait *rqw = get_rq_wait(rwb, current_is_kswapd()); DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, current); + bool has_sleeper; - if (!wq_has_sleeper(&rqw->wait) && - rq_wait_inc_below(rqw, get_limit(rwb, rw))) + has_sleeper = wq_has_sleeper(&rqw->wait); + if (!has_sleeper && rq_wait_inc_below(rqw, get_limit(rwb, rw))) return; add_wait_queue_exclusive(&rqw->wait, &wait); do { set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); - if (rq_wait_inc_below(rqw, get_limit(rwb, rw))) + if (!has_sleeper && rq_wait_inc_below(rqw, get_limit(rwb, rw))) break; if (lock) @@ -538,6 +539,8 @@ static void __wbt_wait(struct rq_wb *rwb, unsigned long rw, spinlock_t *lock) if (lock) spin_lock_irq(lock); + + has_sleeper = false; } while (1); __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING); -- 2.37.1 _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@openvz.org https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
