Re: [PATCH 1/4] blkcg: Drop unnecessary RCU read [un]locks from blkg_conf_prep/finish()

[Tejun Heo]

Hello,

On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 07:49:00AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 10:48:55AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Now that all RCU flavors have been combined, holding a spin lock, disabling
> > irq, disabling preemption all imply RCU read lock.
> 
> Can you write it like this in the commit log, please? 

Sure, will do.

> > I can drop the changes but this actually bothers me. The annotation has been
> > broken for a *long* time and nobody noticed. Furthermore, I can't remember a
> > time when __acquires/__releases notation caught anything that lockdep
> > couldn't trivially and can't even think of a way how it could. AFAICS, these
> > annotations don't contribute anything other than preservation of themselves.
> > I don't see why we would want to keep them.
> 
> People have noticed it.  It just hasn't been a priority as there are
> lots of even more problematic things.

That doesn't really shed a positive light on them, does it? I'll drop this
part but can you think of actual reasons to keep these around other than to
keep sparse happy? I'm genuninely curious and have asked several people.
Nobody had a good answer.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun