bfq: Drop pointless unlock-lock pair

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>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220401102752.8599-5-jack@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>

diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
index 1fc4d4628fbabeaed0a72eb2cccc08d1773c2a46..19082e14f3c188bbad93e5b2844477ce6778b55d 100644 (file)
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
@@ -6150,11 +6150,8 @@ static void bfq_insert_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, struct request *rq,
                return;
        }
 
-       spin_unlock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
-
        trace_block_rq_insert(rq);
 
-       spin_lock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
        bfqq = bfq_init_rq(rq);
        if (!bfqq || at_head) {
                if (at_head)