Re: [PATCH] mmc: queue: exclude asynchronous transfer for special request

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 12/21/2012 07:36 AM, Seungwon Jeon wrote:
On Thursday, December 20, 2012, Konstantin Dorfman wrote:
Hello Jeon,


On 12/20/2012 12:27 PM, Seungwon Jeon wrote:
Unlike normal r/w request, special requests(discard, flush)
is finished with a one-time issue_fn. Request change to
mqrq_prev makes unnecessary call.

Signed-off-by: Seungwon Jeon <tgih.jun@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
   drivers/mmc/card/queue.c |    8 ++++++++
   1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mmc/card/queue.c b/drivers/mmc/card/queue.c
index fadf52e..a71db7a 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/card/queue.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/card/queue.c
@@ -58,6 +58,7 @@ static int mmc_queue_thread(void *d)
   	do {
   		struct request *req = NULL;
   		struct mmc_queue_req *tmp;
+		unsigned int cmd_flags = 0;

   		spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
   		set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
@@ -67,12 +68,19 @@ static int mmc_queue_thread(void *d)

   		if (req || mq->mqrq_prev->req) {
   			set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
+			cmd_flags = req ? req->cmd_flags : 0;
   			mq->issue_fn(mq, req);

   			/*
   			 * Current request becomes previous request
   			 * and vice versa.
+			 * In case of special requests, current request
+			 * has been finished. Do not remain it to previous
+			 * request.
   			 */
+			if (cmd_flags & REQ_DISCARD || cmd_flags & REQ_FLUSH)
+				mq->mqrq_cur->req = NULL;
+
   			mq->mqrq_prev->brq.mrq.data = NULL;
   			mq->mqrq_prev->req = NULL;
   			tmp = mq->mqrq_prev;

It is better to define control mask, REQ_CONTROL_MASK, which will
include all control/special requests.
Agree, it's better.


Then, when additional request will be added, there will be no need to
change here, only update the mask.

Another option - to clean mq->mqrq_cur->req immediately after executing
a special request in mmc_blk_issue_rq().
Yes, I also approached it with the same idea at the beginning.
But it seems that 'queue.c' has a role of management of two requests,
while 'block.c' just uses these request. It makes sense?
Sure, agree with you.

Thanks,

--
Konstantin Dorfman,
QUALCOMM ISRAEL, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center,
Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Media]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux