> On 29 Aug 2018, at 15.00, Matias Bjørling <mb@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 08/29/2018 10:56 AM, Javier González wrote:
>> dma allocations for ppa_list and meta_list in rqd are replicated in
>> several places across the pblk codebase. Make helpers to encapsulate
>> creation and deletion to simplify the code.
>> Signed-off-by: Javier González <javier@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/lightnvm/pblk-core.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>> drivers/lightnvm/pblk-read.c | 35 ++++++++++----------
>> drivers/lightnvm/pblk-recovery.c | 29 ++++++-----------
>> drivers/lightnvm/pblk-write.c | 15 ++-------
>> drivers/lightnvm/pblk.h | 3 ++
>> 5 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 77 deletions(-)
>> diff --git a/drivers/lightnvm/pblk-core.c b/drivers/lightnvm/pblk-core.c
>> index 09160ec02c5f..767178185f19 100644
>> --- a/drivers/lightnvm/pblk-core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/lightnvm/pblk-core.c
>> @@ -237,6 +237,34 @@ static void pblk_invalidate_range(struct pblk *pblk, sector_t slba,
>> spin_unlock(&pblk->trans_lock);
>> }
>> +int pblk_setup_rqd(struct pblk *pblk, struct nvm_rq *rqd, gfp_t mem_flags,
>> + bool is_vector)
>
>
> The mem_flags argument can be removed. It is GFP_KERNEL from all the
> places it is called.
>
Thought it was better to have the flexibility in a helper function, but
we can always add it later on if needed...
> is_vector, will be better to do nr_ppas (or similar name). Then
> pblk_submit_read/pblk_submit_read_gc are a bit cleaner.
>
We can do that too, yes.
>> +{
>> + struct nvm_tgt_dev *dev = pblk->dev;
>> +
>> + rqd->meta_list = nvm_dev_dma_alloc(dev->parent, mem_flags,
>> + &rqd->dma_meta_list);
>> + if (!rqd->meta_list)
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> + if (!is_vector)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + rqd->ppa_list = rqd->meta_list + pblk_dma_meta_size;
>> + rqd->dma_ppa_list = rqd->dma_meta_list + pblk_dma_meta_size;
>
> Wrt to is_vector, does it matter if we just set ppa_list and
> dma_ppa_list? If we have them, we use them, else leave them alone?
>
If we only have 1 address then ppa_addr is set and the ppa_list attempt
to free in the completion path interpreting ppa_addr as the dma address.
So I don't think so - unless I'm missing something?
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +void pblk_clear_rqd(struct pblk *pblk, struct nvm_rq *rqd)
>> +{
>> + struct nvm_tgt_dev *dev = pblk->dev;
>> +
>> + if (rqd->meta_list)
>> + nvm_dev_dma_free(dev->parent, rqd->meta_list,
>> + rqd->dma_meta_list);
>> +}
>
> Looks like setup/clear is mainly about managing the metadata. Would
> pblk_alloc_rqd_meta()/pblk_free/rqd_meta be better names? Unless we
> can fold it all into pblk_alloc_rqd/pblk_free_rqd.
>
It's not easy to fold them there as we use nvm_rq allocations without
extra space in the rqd for metadata. This is also a problem for rqd
allocated in the stack. But I can change the names to make the
functionality more clear.
Javier
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
