On 8/17/24 06:55, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/bnx2fc/bnx2fc_fcoe.c b/drivers/scsi/bnx2fc/bnx2fc_fcoe.c
> index 1078c20c5ef6..f49783b89d04 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/bnx2fc/bnx2fc_fcoe.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/bnx2fc/bnx2fc_fcoe.c
> @@ -2363,8 +2363,8 @@ static int _bnx2fc_create(struct net_device *netdev,
> interface->vlan_id = vlan_id;
> interface->tm_timeout = BNX2FC_TM_TIMEOUT;
>
> - interface->timer_work_queue =
> - create_singlethread_workqueue("bnx2fc_timer_wq");
> + interface->timer_work_queue = alloc_ordered_workqueue(
> + "%s", WQ_MEM_RECLAIM, "bnx2fc_timer_wq");
Very odd line split. And there are a few more like this one. Maybe your patch
needs some manual tuning after running the script ?
The patch overall looks good to me, but it would be nice to have consistency in
the line splitting. Personnally, I prefer the pattern such as:
- kmpath_rdacd = create_singlethread_workqueue("kmpath_rdacd");
+ kmpath_rdacd =
+ alloc_ordered_workqueue("%s", WQ_MEM_RECLAIM, "kmpath_rdacd");
instead of:
- lio_wq = create_singlethread_workqueue("efct_lio_worker");
+ lio_wq = alloc_ordered_workqueue("%s", WQ_MEM_RECLAIM,
+ "efct_lio_worker");
Though I guess that is a matter of taste :)
--
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research
