On 08/09/2013 10:46 AM, Alexander Gordeev wrote: > On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 09:52:19AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 08/09/2013 09:07 AM, Alexander Gordeev wrote: >>> 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. > > Ok, then a whole series "[PATCH 0/3] blk-mq: Avoid effects of a weird queue > depth" (I posted earlier in a separate thread) should make sense. Besides > the hunk above it limits the per-cpu cache size and sanity-checks total vs > reserved length. I can resubmit if you want. You don't have to resubmit, I'll get it reviewed and applied today. -- 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