On Fri, 2017-04-21 at 10:56 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 04/21/2017 10:48 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > I wonder if it's an imbalance in the preempt count. Looking at it, it
> > looks like we're not clearing the alloc data. But I would think that
> > would potentially cause much worse problems, but maybe we got lucky?
> >
> > Let me generate a cleanup patch for that.
>
> Something like the below.
> [ ... ]
> +static inline void blk_mq_init_alloc_data(struct blk_mq_alloc_data *data,
> + unsigned int flags)
> +{
> + data->q = NULL;
> + data->flags = flags;
> + data->shallow_depth = 0;
> + data->ctx = NULL;
> + data->hctx = NULL;
> +}
Hello Jens,
Maybe I'm overlooking something but I don't see how this patch can make
a difference since the compiler zero-initializes struct members that have
not been mentioned explicitly as designated initializers? A common way
to zero-initialize a struct is as follows:
struct <struct_name> <variable_name> = { };
Bart.
