On Wed, 2018-09-26 at 16:30 +-0900, Damien Le Moal wrote: +AD4 diff --git a/block/elevator.c b/block/elevator.c +AD4 index 6a06b5d040e5..8cd81fd6339a 100644 +AD4 --- a/block/elevator.c +AD4 +-+-+- b/block/elevator.c +AD4 +AEAAQA -609,7 +-609,7 +AEAAQA void elv+AF8-drain+AF8-elevator(struct request+AF8-queue +ACo-q) +AD4 +AD4 while (e-+AD4-type-+AD4-ops.sq.elevator+AF8-dispatch+AF8-fn(q, 1)) +AD4 +ADs +AD4 - if (q-+AD4-nr+AF8-sorted +ACYAJg printed+-+- +ADw 10) +AHs +AD4 +- if (q-+AD4-nr+AF8-sorted +ACYAJg printed+-+- +ADw 10 +ACYAJg +ACE-blk+AF8-queue+AF8-is+AF8-zoned(q)) +AHs +AD4 printk(KERN+AF8-ERR +ACIAJQ-s: forced dispatching is broken +ACI +AD4 +ACI(nr+AF8-sorted+AD0AJQ-u), please report this+AFw-n+ACI, +AD4 q-+AD4-elevator-+AD4-type-+AD4-elevator+AF8-name, q-+AD4-nr+AF8-sorted)+ADs It seems wrong to me to perform the blk+AF8-queue+AF8-is+AF8-zoned() check after having incremented the +ACI-printed+ACI variable. Shouldn't that check be performed before incrementing the +ACI-printed+ACI variable to avoid that +ACI-printed+ACI gets incremented if we know that we are not going to report the error message? Thanks, Bart.
