Re: [PATCH 1/2] nvme-pci: Remove tag from process cq

[Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>]

On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 11:46:15AM -0800, Keith Busch wrote:
> The only user for tagged completion was for timeout handling. That user,
> though, really only cares if the timed out command is completed, which
> we can safely check within the timeout handler.
> 
> Remove the tag check to simplify completion handling.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
> ---
>  drivers/nvme/host/pci.c | 22 +++++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c b/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
> index da392b50f73e..db84283f2a5a 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
> @@ -991,14 +991,13 @@ static inline void nvme_update_cq_head(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq)
>  }
>  
>  static inline int nvme_process_cq(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq, u16 *start,
> -				  u16 *end, unsigned int tag)
> +				  u16 *end)
>  {
>  	int found = 0;
>  
>  	*start = nvmeq->cq_head;
>  	while (nvme_cqe_pending(nvmeq)) {
> -		if (tag == -1U || nvmeq->cqes[nvmeq->cq_head].command_id == tag)
> -			found++;
> +		++found;

Any reason for moving from found++ to ++found?  I always find the infix
notation a little odd when there is no need for it, but that is just a
personal preference.

>  	 */
> -	if (nvme_poll_irqdisable(nvmeq, req->tag)) {
> +	if (nvme_poll_irqdisable(nvmeq) &&
> +	    blk_mq_request_completed(req)) {

Do we need to check the nvme_poll_irqdisable value here?  If it got
completed by other means we should be fine too, shouldn't we?

_______________________________________________
linux-nvme mailing list
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme