On 10/19/2016 06:23 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
+/**
+ * blk_mq_quiesce_queue() - wait until all ongoing queue_rq calls have finished
+ *
+ * Note: this function does not prevent that the struct request end_io()
+ * callback function is invoked. Additionally, it is not prevented that
+ * new queue_rq() calls occur unless the queue has been stopped first.
+ */
+void blk_mq_quiesce_queue(struct request_queue *q)
If this is intended to be a kerneldoc comment you need to document the 'q'
parameter. If not you should drop the magic "/**" marker.
Good catch. I will document the 'q' parameter.
+static void __blk_mq_run_hw_queue(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
+{
+ int srcu_idx;
+
+ WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(), hctx->cpumask) &&
+ cpu_online(hctx->next_cpu));
+
+ if (!(hctx->flags & BLK_MQ_F_BLOCKING)) {
+ rcu_read_lock();
+ blk_mq_process_rq_list(hctx);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+ } else {
+ srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&hctx->queue_rq_srcu);
+ blk_mq_process_rq_list(hctx);
+ srcu_read_unlock(&hctx->queue_rq_srcu, srcu_idx);
+ }
+}
Can you document these synchronization changes in detail in the changelog?
Sure, I will do that.
+static void blk_mq_try_issue_directly(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
+ struct request *rq, blk_qc_t *cookie)
+{
+ if (blk_mq_hctx_stopped(hctx) ||
+ blk_mq_direct_issue_request(rq, cookie) != 0)
+ blk_mq_insert_request(rq, false, true, true);
+}
Any reason not to merge this function with blk_mq_direct_issue_request?
That sounds like a good idea to me. I will make the proposed change.
Bart.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
