From e11c514a349976622293a43f3328107470fa3fc9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001

From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>

Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 16:21:39 +0100

Subject: [PATCH 5/9] bfq: Drop pointless unlock-lock pair

References: bsc#1197926

Patch-mainline: submitted, in linux-block tree

In bfq_insert_request() we unlock bfqd->lock only to call

trace_block_rq_insert() and then lock bfqd->lock again. This is really

pointless since tracing is disabled if we really care about performance

and even if the tracepoint is enabled, it is a quick call.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org

Tested-by: "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>

Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>

---

 block/bfq-iosched.c |    3 ---

 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

--- a/block/bfq-iosched.c

+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c

@@ -5668,11 +5668,8 @@ static void bfq_insert_request(struct bl

 		return;

 	}

-	spin_unlock_irq(&bfqd->lock);

-

 	blk_mq_sched_request_inserted(rq);

-	spin_lock_irq(&bfqd->lock);

 	bfqq = bfq_init_rq(rq);

 	if (!bfqq || at_head || blk_rq_is_passthrough(rq)) {

 		if (at_head)