On 08/09/2013 09:07 AM, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 08:24:38AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 08/09/2013 02:23 AM, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
>>> + ap->qc_tags = blk_mq_init_tags(ATA_MAX_QUEUE, 1, NUMA_NO_NODE);
>>> + if (!ap->qc_tags) {
>>> + kfree(ap);
>>> + return NULL;
>>> + }
>>
>> This should be blk_mq_init_tags(ATA_MAX_QUEUE - 1, 1, ...) since the
>> total depth is normal_tags + reserved_tags.
>
> Aha.. If blk_mq_init_tags() should be like this then?
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-mq-tag.c b/block/blk-mq-tag.c
> index dcbc2a4..b131a48 100644
> --- a/block/blk-mq-tag.c
> +++ b/block/blk-mq-tag.c
> @@ -468,10 +468,9 @@ struct blk_mq_tags *blk_mq_init_tags(unsigned int nr_tags,
> * Rest of the tags start at the queue list
> */
> tags->nr_free = 0;
> - while (nr_tags - tags->nr_reserved) {
> + while (nr_tags--) {
> tags->freelist[tags->nr_free] = tags->nr_free +
> tags->nr_reserved;
> - nr_tags--;
> tags->nr_free++;
> }
I misremembered, just checked the code. I think I used to have it like I
described, but changed it since I thought it would be more logical to
pass in full depth, and then what part of that is reserved. Looking at
the current code, your patch looks correct as-is.
--
Jens Axboe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
