On 8/21/23 00:35, chengming.zhou@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
@@ -417,7 +425,23 @@ static void __blk_mq_all_tag_iter(struct blk_mq_tags *tags,
void blk_mq_all_tag_iter(struct blk_mq_tags *tags, busy_tag_iter_fn *fn,
void *priv)
{
- __blk_mq_all_tag_iter(tags, fn, priv, BT_TAG_ITER_STATIC_RQS);
+ __blk_mq_all_tag_iter(tags, fn, priv, BT_TAG_ITER_STATIC_RQS, NULL);
+}
+
+static void __blk_mq_tagset_busy_iter(struct blk_mq_tag_set *tagset,
+ busy_tag_iter_fn *fn, void *priv,
+ struct request_queue *q)
+{
+ unsigned int flags = tagset->flags;
+ int i, nr_tags;
+
+ nr_tags = blk_mq_is_shared_tags(flags) ? 1 : tagset->nr_hw_queues;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < nr_tags; i++) {
+ if (tagset->tags && tagset->tags[i])
+ __blk_mq_all_tag_iter(tagset->tags[i], fn, priv,
+ BT_TAG_ITER_STARTED, q);
+ }
}
/**
@@ -436,16 +460,7 @@ void blk_mq_all_tag_iter(struct blk_mq_tags *tags, busy_tag_iter_fn *fn,
void blk_mq_tagset_busy_iter(struct blk_mq_tag_set *tagset,
busy_tag_iter_fn *fn, void *priv)
{
- unsigned int flags = tagset->flags;
- int i, nr_tags;
-
- nr_tags = blk_mq_is_shared_tags(flags) ? 1 : tagset->nr_hw_queues;
-
- for (i = 0; i < nr_tags; i++) {
- if (tagset->tags && tagset->tags[i])
- __blk_mq_all_tag_iter(tagset->tags[i], fn, priv,
- BT_TAG_ITER_STARTED);
- }
+ __blk_mq_tagset_busy_iter(tagset, fn, priv, NULL);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_mq_tagset_busy_iter);
One change per patch please. I think the introduction of __blk_mq_tagset_busy_iter()
should be a separate patch instead of happening in this patch.
Thanks,
Bart.