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)