On 2/24/20 8:48 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 24/02/2020 18:30, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 2/24/20 1:30 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>> io_prep_async_worker() called io_wq_assign_next() do many useless checks:
>>> io_req_work_grab_env() was already called during prep, and @do_hashed
>>> is not ever used. Add io_prep_next_work() -- simplified version, that
>>> can be called io-wq.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> fs/io_uring.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
>>> index 819661f49023..3003e767ced3 100644
>>> --- a/fs/io_uring.c
>>> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c
>>> @@ -955,6 +955,17 @@ static inline void io_req_work_drop_env(struct io_kiocb *req)
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static inline void io_prep_next_work(struct io_kiocb *req,
>>> + struct io_kiocb **link)
>>> +{
>>> + const struct io_op_def *def = &io_op_defs[req->opcode];
>>> +
>>> + if (!(req->flags & REQ_F_ISREG) && def->unbound_nonreg_file)
>>> + req->work.flags |= IO_WQ_WORK_UNBOUND;
>>
>> Extra tab?
>
> Yep. Would resending [2/3] be enough?
No need, I just did a hand edit of the patch before applying.
--
Jens Axboe
