[PATCH 3/3] io-wq: use IO_WQ_ACCT_NR rather than hardcoded number

[Hao Xu <haoxu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

It's better to use the defined enum stuff not the hardcoded number to
define array.

Signed-off-by: Hao Xu <haoxu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
 fs/io-wq.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/io-wq.c b/fs/io-wq.c
index f7b7fa396faf..5b93fa67d346 100644
--- a/fs/io-wq.c
+++ b/fs/io-wq.c
@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ enum {
  */
 struct io_wqe {
 	raw_spinlock_t lock;
-	struct io_wqe_acct acct[2];
+	struct io_wqe_acct acct[IO_WQ_ACCT_NR];
 
 	int node;
 
@@ -1376,7 +1376,7 @@ int io_wq_max_workers(struct io_wq *wq, int *new_count)
 	BUILD_BUG_ON((int) IO_WQ_ACCT_UNBOUND != (int) IO_WQ_UNBOUND);
 	BUILD_BUG_ON((int) IO_WQ_ACCT_NR      != 2);
 
-	for (i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
+	for (i = 0; i < IO_WQ_ACCT_NR; i++) {
 		if (new_count[i] > task_rlimit(current, RLIMIT_NPROC))
 			new_count[i] = task_rlimit(current, RLIMIT_NPROC);
 	}
-- 
2.25.1