On 12/6/22 17:15, Paolo Valente wrote: > Single-LUN multi-actuator SCSI drives, as well as all multi-actuator > SATA drives appear as a single device to the I/O subsystem [1]. Yet > they address commands to different actuators internally, as a function > of Logical Block Addressing (LBAs). A given sector is reachable by > only one of the actuators. For example, Seagate’s Serial Advanced > Technology Attachment (SATA) version contains two actuators and maps > the lower half of the SATA LBA space to the lower actuator and the > upper half to the upper actuator. > > Evidently, to fully utilize actuators, no actuator must be left idle > or underutilized while there is pending I/O for it. The block layer > must somehow control the load of each actuator individually. This > commit lays the ground for allowing BFQ to provide such a per-actuator > control. > > BFQ associates an I/O-request sync bfq_queue with each process doing > synchronous I/O, or with a group of processes, in case of queue > merging. Then BFQ serves one bfq_queue at a time. While in service, a > bfq_queue is emptied in request-position order. Yet the same process, > or group of processes, may generate I/O for different actuators. In > this case, different streams of I/O (each for a different actuator) > get all inserted into the same sync bfq_queue. So there is basically > no individual control on when each stream is served, i.e., on when the > I/O requests of the stream are picked from the bfq_queue and > dispatched to the drive. > > This commit enables BFQ to control the service of each actuator > individually for synchronous I/O, by simply splitting each sync > bfq_queue into N queues, one for each actuator. In other words, a sync > bfq_queue is now associated to a pair (process, actuator). As a > consequence of this split, the per-queue proportional-share policy > implemented by BFQ will guarantee that the sync I/O generated for each > actuator, by each process, receives its fair share of service. > > This is just a preparatory patch. If the I/O of the same process > happens to be sent to different queues, then each of these queues may > undergo queue merging. To handle this event, the bfq_io_cq data > structure must be properly extended. In addition, stable merging must > be disabled to avoid loss of control on individual actuators. Finally, > also async queues must be split. These issues are described in detail > and addressed in next commits. As for this commit, although multiple > per-process bfq_queues are provided, the I/O of each process or group > of processes is still sent to only one queue, regardless of the > actuator the I/O is for. The forwarding to distinct bfq_queues will be > enabled after addressing the above issues. > > [1] https://www.linaro.org/blog/budget-fair-queueing-bfq-linux-io-scheduler-optimizations-for-multi-actuator-sata-hard-drives/ > > Signed-off-by: Gabriele Felici <felicigb@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Carmine Zaccagnino <carmine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > block/bfq-cgroup.c | 93 ++++++++++++++------------ > block/bfq-iosched.c | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- > block/bfq-iosched.h | 51 +++++++++++--- > 3 files changed, 196 insertions(+), 106 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/block/bfq-cgroup.c b/block/bfq-cgroup.c > index 7d624a3a3f0f..8275cdd4573f 100644 > --- a/block/bfq-cgroup.c > +++ b/block/bfq-cgroup.c > @@ -704,6 +704,48 @@ void bfq_bfqq_move(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq, > bfq_put_queue(bfqq); > } > > +static void bfq_sync_bfqq_move(struct bfq_data *bfqd, > + struct bfq_queue *sync_bfqq, > + struct bfq_io_cq *bic, > + struct bfq_group *bfqg, > + unsigned int act_idx) > +{ > + struct bfq_queue *bfqq; > + > + if (!sync_bfqq->new_bfqq && !bfq_bfqq_coop(sync_bfqq)) { > + /* We are the only user of this bfqq, just move it */ > + if (sync_bfqq->entity.sched_data != &bfqg->sched_data) > + bfq_bfqq_move(bfqd, sync_bfqq, bfqg); > + return; > + } > + > + /* > + * The queue was merged to a different queue. Check > + * that the merge chain still belongs to the same > + * cgroup. > + */ > + for (bfqq = sync_bfqq; bfqq; bfqq = bfqq->new_bfqq) > + if (bfqq->entity.sched_data != > + &bfqg->sched_data) > + break; > + if (bfqq) { > + /* > + * Some queue changed cgroup so the merge is > + * not valid anymore. We cannot easily just > + * cancel the merge (by clearing new_bfqq) as > + * there may be other processes using this > + * queue and holding refs to all queues below > + * sync_bfqq->new_bfqq. Similarly if the merge > + * already happened, we need to detach from > + * bfqq now so that we cannot merge bio to a > + * request from the old cgroup. > + */ Why the short lines here ? You can format this like this: /* * Some queue changed cgroup so the merge is not valid anymore. * We cannot easily just cancel the merge (by clearing new_bfqq) * as there may be other processes using this queue and holding * refs to all queues below sync_bfqq->new_bfqq. Similarly if * the merge already happened, we need to detach from bfqq now * so that we cannot merge bio to a request from the old cgroup. */ That is still within 80 chars. > + bfq_put_cooperator(sync_bfqq); > + bfq_release_process_ref(bfqd, sync_bfqq); > + bic_set_bfqq(bic, NULL, 1, act_idx); > + } > +} > + [...] > return bfqg; > diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c > index 7ea427817f7f..127aeecaf903 100644 > --- a/block/bfq-iosched.c > +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c > @@ -377,14 +377,21 @@ static const unsigned long bfq_late_stable_merging = 600; > #define RQ_BIC(rq) ((struct bfq_io_cq *)((rq)->elv.priv[0])) > #define RQ_BFQQ(rq) ((rq)->elv.priv[1]) > > -struct bfq_queue *bic_to_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, bool is_sync) > +struct bfq_queue *bic_to_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, bool is_sync, > + unsigned int actuator_idx) > { > - return bic->bfqq[is_sync]; See below. But here, you could add: if (!bic) return NULL; > + if (is_sync) > + return bic->bfqq[1][actuator_idx]; > + > + return bic->bfqq[0][actuator_idx]; > } > > static void bfq_put_stable_ref(struct bfq_queue *bfqq); > > -void bic_set_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, struct bfq_queue *bfqq, bool is_sync) > +void bic_set_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, > + struct bfq_queue *bfqq, > + bool is_sync, > + unsigned int actuator_idx) > { > /* > * If bfqq != NULL, then a non-stable queue merge between > @@ -399,7 +406,10 @@ void bic_set_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, struct bfq_queue *bfqq, bool is_sync) > * we cancel the stable merge if > * bic->stable_merge_bfqq == bfqq. > */ > - bic->bfqq[is_sync] = bfqq; > + if (is_sync) > + bic->bfqq[1][actuator_idx] = bfqq; > + else > + bic->bfqq[0][actuator_idx] = bfqq; > > if (bfqq && bic->stable_merge_bfqq == bfqq) { > /* > @@ -672,9 +682,9 @@ static void bfq_limit_depth(blk_opf_t opf, struct blk_mq_alloc_data *data) > { > struct bfq_data *bfqd = data->q->elevator->elevator_data; > struct bfq_io_cq *bic = bfq_bic_lookup(data->q); > - struct bfq_queue *bfqq = bic ? bic_to_bfqq(bic, op_is_sync(opf)) : NULL; > int depth; > unsigned limit = data->q->nr_requests; > + unsigned int act_idx; > > /* Sync reads have full depth available */ > if (op_is_sync(opf) && !op_is_write(opf)) { > @@ -684,14 +694,21 @@ static void bfq_limit_depth(blk_opf_t opf, struct blk_mq_alloc_data *data) > limit = (limit * depth) >> bfqd->full_depth_shift; > } > > - /* > - * Does queue (or any parent entity) exceed number of requests that > - * should be available to it? Heavily limit depth so that it cannot > - * consume more available requests and thus starve other entities. > - */ > - if (bfqq && bfqq_request_over_limit(bfqq, limit)) > - depth = 1; > + for (act_idx = 0; act_idx < bfqd->num_actuators; act_idx++) { > + struct bfq_queue *bfqq = > + bic ? bic_to_bfqq(bic, op_is_sync(opf), act_idx) : NULL; You could return NULL in bic_to_bfqq() if bic is NULL. That would avoid this cludge. > > + /* > + * Does queue (or any parent entity) exceed number of > + * requests that should be available to it? Heavily > + * limit depth so that it cannot consume more > + * available requests and thus starve other entities. > + */ > + if (bfqq && bfqq_request_over_limit(bfqq, limit)) { > + depth = 1; > + break; > + } > + } > bfq_log(bfqd, "[%s] wr_busy %d sync %d depth %u", > __func__, bfqd->wr_busy_queues, op_is_sync(opf), depth); > if (depth) > @@ -1812,6 +1829,18 @@ static bool bfq_bfqq_higher_class_or_weight(struct bfq_queue *bfqq, > return bfqq_weight > in_serv_weight; > } > > +/* > + * Get the index of the actuator that will serve bio. > + */ > +static unsigned int bfq_actuator_index(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bio *bio) > +{ > + /* > + * Multi-actuator support not complete yet, so always return 0 > + * for the moment (to keep incomplete mechanisms off). > + */ > + return 0; > +} > + > static bool bfq_better_to_idle(struct bfq_queue *bfqq); > > static void bfq_bfqq_handle_idle_busy_switch(struct bfq_data *bfqd, > @@ -2142,7 +2171,7 @@ static void bfq_check_waker(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq, > * We reset waker detection logic also if too much time has passed > * since the first detection. If wakeups are rare, pointless idling > * doesn't hurt throughput that much. The condition below makes sure > - * we do not uselessly idle blocking waker in more than 1/64 cases. > + * we do not uselessly idle blocking waker in more than 1/64 cases. > */ > if (bfqd->last_completed_rq_bfqq != > bfqq->tentative_waker_bfqq || > @@ -2478,7 +2507,8 @@ static bool bfq_bio_merge(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio, > */ > bfq_bic_update_cgroup(bic, bio); > > - bfqd->bio_bfqq = bic_to_bfqq(bic, op_is_sync(bio->bi_opf)); > + bfqd->bio_bfqq = bic_to_bfqq(bic, op_is_sync(bio->bi_opf), > + bfq_actuator_index(bfqd, bio)); Given that you repeat this pattern a lot, might be worth having a wrapper like: static inline struct bfq_queue *bio_to_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, struct bio *bio) { return bic_to_bfqq(bic, op_is_sync(bio->bi_opf), bfq_actuator_index(bfqd, bio)); } The code would be less verbose while still being clear. > } else { > bfqd->bio_bfqq = NULL; > } > @@ -3174,7 +3204,7 @@ bfq_merge_bfqqs(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_io_cq *bic, > /* > * Merge queues (that is, let bic redirect its requests to new_bfqq) > */ > - bic_set_bfqq(bic, new_bfqq, 1); > + bic_set_bfqq(bic, new_bfqq, 1, bfqq->actuator_idx); s/1/true (the third argument is a bool). same comment for some other calls below. > bfq_mark_bfqq_coop(new_bfqq); > /* > * new_bfqq now belongs to at least two bics (it is a shared queue): > @@ -4808,11 +4838,8 @@ static struct bfq_queue *bfq_select_queue(struct bfq_data *bfqd) > */ > if (bfq_bfqq_wait_request(bfqq) || > (bfqq->dispatched != 0 && bfq_better_to_idle(bfqq))) { > - struct bfq_queue *async_bfqq = > - bfqq->bic && bfqq->bic->bfqq[0] && > - bfq_bfqq_busy(bfqq->bic->bfqq[0]) && > - bfqq->bic->bfqq[0]->next_rq ? > - bfqq->bic->bfqq[0] : NULL; > + unsigned int act_idx = bfqq->actuator_idx; > + struct bfq_queue *async_bfqq = NULL; > struct bfq_queue *blocked_bfqq = > !hlist_empty(&bfqq->woken_list) ? > container_of(bfqq->woken_list.first, > @@ -4820,6 +4847,10 @@ static struct bfq_queue *bfq_select_queue(struct bfq_data *bfqd) > woken_list_node) > : NULL; > > + if (bfqq->bic && bfqq->bic->bfqq[0][act_idx] && > + bfq_bfqq_busy(bfqq->bic->bfqq[0][act_idx]) && > + bfqq->bic->bfqq[0][act_idx]->next_rq) > + async_bfqq = bfqq->bic->bfqq[0][act_idx]; > /* > * The next four mutually-exclusive ifs decide > * whether to try injection, and choose the queue to > @@ -4904,7 +4935,7 @@ static struct bfq_queue *bfq_select_queue(struct bfq_data *bfqd) > icq_to_bic(async_bfqq->next_rq->elv.icq) == bfqq->bic && > bfq_serv_to_charge(async_bfqq->next_rq, async_bfqq) <= > bfq_bfqq_budget_left(async_bfqq)) > - bfqq = bfqq->bic->bfqq[0]; > + bfqq = bfqq->bic->bfqq[0][act_idx]; > else if (bfqq->waker_bfqq && > bfq_bfqq_busy(bfqq->waker_bfqq) && > bfqq->waker_bfqq->next_rq && > @@ -5365,49 +5396,55 @@ static void bfq_exit_bfqq(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq) > bfq_release_process_ref(bfqd, bfqq); > } > > -static void bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, bool is_sync) > +static void bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, bool is_sync, > + unsigned int actuator_idx) > { > - struct bfq_queue *bfqq = bic_to_bfqq(bic, is_sync); > + struct bfq_queue *bfqq = bic_to_bfqq(bic, is_sync, actuator_idx); > struct bfq_data *bfqd; > > if (bfqq) > bfqd = bfqq->bfqd; /* NULL if scheduler already exited */ > > if (bfqq && bfqd) { > - unsigned long flags; > - > - spin_lock_irqsave(&bfqd->lock, flags); > bfqq->bic = NULL; > bfq_exit_bfqq(bfqd, bfqq); > - bic_set_bfqq(bic, NULL, is_sync); > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bfqd->lock, flags); > + bic_set_bfqq(bic, NULL, is_sync, actuator_idx); > } > } > > static void bfq_exit_icq(struct io_cq *icq) > { > struct bfq_io_cq *bic = icq_to_bic(icq); > + struct bfq_data *bfqd = bic_to_bfqd(bic); > + unsigned long flags; > + unsigned int act_idx; > + /* > + * If bfqd and thus bfqd->num_actuators is not available any > + * longer, then cycle over all possible per-actuator bfqqs in > + * next loop. We rely on bic being zeroed on creation, and > + * therefore on its unused per-actuator fields being NULL. > + */ > + unsigned int num_actuators = BFQ_MAX_ACTUATORS; > > - if (bic->stable_merge_bfqq) { > - struct bfq_data *bfqd = bic->stable_merge_bfqq->bfqd; > + /* > + * bfqd is NULL if scheduler already exited, and in that case > + * this is the last time these queues are accessed. > + */ > + if (bfqd) { > + spin_lock_irqsave(&bfqd->lock, flags); > + num_actuators = bfqd->num_actuators; > + } > > - /* > - * bfqd is NULL if scheduler already exited, and in > - * that case this is the last time bfqq is accessed. > - */ > - if (bfqd) { > - unsigned long flags; > + if (bic->stable_merge_bfqq) > + bfq_put_stable_ref(bic->stable_merge_bfqq); > > - spin_lock_irqsave(&bfqd->lock, flags); > - bfq_put_stable_ref(bic->stable_merge_bfqq); > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bfqd->lock, flags); > - } else { > - bfq_put_stable_ref(bic->stable_merge_bfqq); > - } > + for (act_idx = 0; act_idx < num_actuators; act_idx++) { > + bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(bic, true, act_idx); > + bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(bic, false, act_idx); > } > > - bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(bic, true); > - bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(bic, false); > + if (bfqd) > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bfqd->lock, flags); > } > > /* > @@ -5484,23 +5521,25 @@ static void bfq_check_ioprio_change(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, struct bio *bio) > > bic->ioprio = ioprio; > > - bfqq = bic_to_bfqq(bic, false); > + bfqq = bic_to_bfqq(bic, false, bfq_actuator_index(bfqd, bio)); > if (bfqq) { > bfq_release_process_ref(bfqd, bfqq); > bfqq = bfq_get_queue(bfqd, bio, false, bic, true); > - bic_set_bfqq(bic, bfqq, false); > + bic_set_bfqq(bic, bfqq, false, bfq_actuator_index(bfqd, bio)); > } > > - bfqq = bic_to_bfqq(bic, true); > + bfqq = bic_to_bfqq(bic, true, bfq_actuator_index(bfqd, bio)); > if (bfqq) > bfq_set_next_ioprio_data(bfqq, bic); > } > > static void bfq_init_bfqq(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq, > - struct bfq_io_cq *bic, pid_t pid, int is_sync) > + struct bfq_io_cq *bic, pid_t pid, int is_sync, > + unsigned int act_idx) > { > u64 now_ns = ktime_get_ns(); > > + bfqq->actuator_idx = act_idx; > RB_CLEAR_NODE(&bfqq->entity.rb_node); > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&bfqq->fifo); > INIT_HLIST_NODE(&bfqq->burst_list_node); > @@ -5753,7 +5792,7 @@ static struct bfq_queue *bfq_get_queue(struct bfq_data *bfqd, > > if (bfqq) { > bfq_init_bfqq(bfqd, bfqq, bic, current->pid, > - is_sync); > + is_sync, bfq_actuator_index(bfqd, bio)); > bfq_init_entity(&bfqq->entity, bfqg); > bfq_log_bfqq(bfqd, bfqq, "allocated"); > } else { > @@ -6068,7 +6107,8 @@ static bool __bfq_insert_request(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct request *rq) > * then complete the merge and redirect it to > * new_bfqq. > */ > - if (bic_to_bfqq(RQ_BIC(rq), 1) == bfqq) > + if (bic_to_bfqq(RQ_BIC(rq), 1, > + bfq_actuator_index(bfqd, rq->bio)) == bfqq) s/1/true > bfq_merge_bfqqs(bfqd, RQ_BIC(rq), > bfqq, new_bfqq); > > @@ -6622,7 +6662,7 @@ bfq_split_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, struct bfq_queue *bfqq) > return bfqq; > } > > - bic_set_bfqq(bic, NULL, 1); > + bic_set_bfqq(bic, NULL, 1, bfqq->actuator_idx); Same. > > bfq_put_cooperator(bfqq); > > @@ -6636,7 +6676,8 @@ static struct bfq_queue *bfq_get_bfqq_handle_split(struct bfq_data *bfqd, > bool split, bool is_sync, > bool *new_queue) > { > - struct bfq_queue *bfqq = bic_to_bfqq(bic, is_sync); > + unsigned int act_idx = bfq_actuator_index(bfqd, bio); > + struct bfq_queue *bfqq = bic_to_bfqq(bic, is_sync, act_idx); > > if (likely(bfqq && bfqq != &bfqd->oom_bfqq)) > return bfqq; > @@ -6648,7 +6689,7 @@ static struct bfq_queue *bfq_get_bfqq_handle_split(struct bfq_data *bfqd, > bfq_put_queue(bfqq); > bfqq = bfq_get_queue(bfqd, bio, is_sync, bic, split); > > - bic_set_bfqq(bic, bfqq, is_sync); > + bic_set_bfqq(bic, bfqq, is_sync, act_idx); > if (split && is_sync) { > if ((bic->was_in_burst_list && bfqd->large_burst) || > bic->saved_in_large_burst) > @@ -7090,8 +7131,10 @@ static int bfq_init_queue(struct request_queue *q, struct elevator_type *e) > * Our fallback bfqq if bfq_find_alloc_queue() runs into OOM issues. > * Grab a permanent reference to it, so that the normal code flow > * will not attempt to free it. > + * Set zero as actuator index: we will pretend that > + * all I/O requests are for the same actuator. > */ > - bfq_init_bfqq(bfqd, &bfqd->oom_bfqq, NULL, 1, 0); > + bfq_init_bfqq(bfqd, &bfqd->oom_bfqq, NULL, 1, 0, 0); > bfqd->oom_bfqq.ref++; > bfqd->oom_bfqq.new_ioprio = BFQ_DEFAULT_QUEUE_IOPRIO; > bfqd->oom_bfqq.new_ioprio_class = IOPRIO_CLASS_BE; > @@ -7110,6 +7153,13 @@ static int bfq_init_queue(struct request_queue *q, struct elevator_type *e) > > bfqd->queue = q; > > + /* > + * Multi-actuator support not complete yet, unconditionally > + * set to only one actuator for the moment (to keep incomplete > + * mechanisms off). > + */ > + bfqd->num_actuators = 1; > + > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&bfqd->dispatch); > > hrtimer_init(&bfqd->idle_slice_timer, CLOCK_MONOTONIC, > diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.h b/block/bfq-iosched.h > index 71f721670ab6..2b413ddffbb9 100644 > --- a/block/bfq-iosched.h > +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.h > @@ -33,6 +33,14 @@ > */ > #define BFQ_SOFTRT_WEIGHT_FACTOR 100 > > +/* > + * Maximum number of actuators supported. This constant is used simply > + * to define the size of the static array that will contain > + * per-actuator data. The current value is hopefully a good upper > + * bound to the possible number of actuators of any actual drive. > + */ > +#define BFQ_MAX_ACTUATORS 8 > + > struct bfq_entity; > > /** > @@ -225,12 +233,14 @@ struct bfq_ttime { > * struct bfq_queue - leaf schedulable entity. > * > * A bfq_queue is a leaf request queue; it can be associated with an > - * io_context or more, if it is async or shared between cooperating > - * processes. @cgroup holds a reference to the cgroup, to be sure that it > - * does not disappear while a bfqq still references it (mostly to avoid > - * races between request issuing and task migration followed by cgroup > - * destruction). > - * All the fields are protected by the queue lock of the containing bfqd. > + * io_context or more, if it is async or shared between cooperating > + * processes. Besides, it contains I/O requests for only one actuator > + * (an io_context is associated with a different bfq_queue for each > + * actuator it generates I/O for). @cgroup holds a reference to the > + * cgroup, to be sure that it does not disappear while a bfqq still > + * references it (mostly to avoid races between request issuing and > + * task migration followed by cgroup destruction). All the fields are > + * protected by the queue lock of the containing bfqd. > */ > struct bfq_queue { > /* reference counter */ > @@ -395,6 +405,9 @@ struct bfq_queue { > * the woken queues when this queue exits. > */ > struct hlist_head woken_list; > + > + /* index of the actuator this queue is associated with */ > + unsigned int actuator_idx; > }; > > /** > @@ -403,8 +416,17 @@ struct bfq_queue { > struct bfq_io_cq { > /* associated io_cq structure */ > struct io_cq icq; /* must be the first member */ > - /* array of two process queues, the sync and the async */ > - struct bfq_queue *bfqq[2]; > + /* > + * Matrix of associated process queues: first row for async > + * queues, second row sync queues. Each row contains one > + * column for each actuator. An I/O request generated by the > + * process is inserted into the queue pointed by bfqq[i][j] if > + * the request is to be served by the j-th actuator of the > + * drive, where i==0 or i==1, depending on whether the request > + * is async or sync. So there is a distinct queue for each > + * actuator. > + */ > + struct bfq_queue *bfqq[2][BFQ_MAX_ACTUATORS]; > /* per (request_queue, blkcg) ioprio */ > int ioprio; > #ifdef CONFIG_BFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED > @@ -768,6 +790,13 @@ struct bfq_data { > */ > unsigned int word_depths[2][2]; > unsigned int full_depth_shift; > + > + /* > + * Number of independent actuators. This is equal to 1 in > + * case of single-actuator drives. > + */ > + unsigned int num_actuators; > + > }; > > enum bfqq_state_flags { > @@ -964,8 +993,10 @@ struct bfq_group { > > extern const int bfq_timeout; > > -struct bfq_queue *bic_to_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, bool is_sync); > -void bic_set_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, struct bfq_queue *bfqq, bool is_sync); > +struct bfq_queue *bic_to_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, bool is_sync, > + unsigned int actuator_idx); > +void bic_set_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, struct bfq_queue *bfqq, bool is_sync, > + unsigned int actuator_idx); > struct bfq_data *bic_to_bfqd(struct bfq_io_cq *bic); > void bfq_pos_tree_add_move(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq); > void bfq_weights_tree_add(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq, -- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research
