Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> We just need to decide if this makes sense or not. I think we should >> apply this for 5.10, with Ming's suggestion of using >> blk_mq_request_started(). Then I guess we'll see what happens... > > Hello, > > Here is the second version, then. But, instead of > blk_mq_request_started as suggested on the review, this uses > blk_mq_rq_state to access the state attribute, since we don't want to > include MQ_RQ_COMPLETE. > > Also, improved the commit message a bit. > Hi Jens, Sorry for the ping. Have you made a decision here? Thanks, -- Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
