On Tue, Jul 02, 2024 at 07:09:24PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > I feel the name of ublk_nosrv_should_queue_io() is a bit misleading. > > The difference between ublk_queue_can_use_recovery() and > ublk_queue_can_use_recovery_reissue() is clear, and > both two need to queue ios actually in case of nosrv most times > except for this one. Well yeah, this refactoring is all to set up for the final patch in this series. Taken in isolation, it might appear pointless. I'm open to suggestions for better names if you have them. > I'd rather to not fetch ublk_device in fast io path since ublk is MQ > device, and only the queue structure should be touched in fast io path, > but it is fine to check device in any slow path. Added a helper which checks the queue-local copy of the device flags, and used it in ublk_queue_rq in v2. Sorry for the delay; please take a look.
