From: m@bjorling.me (Matias Bjørling)
Subject: [PATCH v4] NVMe: basic conversion to blk-mq
Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 13:46:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <538C642B.3000107@bjorling.me> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140602100821.GB30612@infradead.org>
On 06/02/2014 12:08 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> +static int nvme_map_rq(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq, struct nvme_iod *iod,
>> + struct request *req, enum dma_data_direction dma_dir,
>> + int psegs)
>> {
>> sg_init_table(iod->sg, psegs);
>> + iod->nents = blk_rq_map_sg(req->q, req, iod->sg);
>>
>> + if (!dma_map_sg(nvmeq->q_dmadev, iod->sg, iod->nents, dma_dir))
>> return -ENOMEM;
>>
>> + return iod->nents;
>
> Given how simple I'd suggest merging this into the only caller.
Ok
>
>> +static int nvme_submit_iod(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq, struct nvme_iod *iod,
>> + struct nvme_ns *ns)
>> {
>> + struct request *req = iod->private;
>> struct nvme_command *cmnd;
>> + u16 control = 0;
>> + u32 dsmgmt = 0;
>>
>> + spin_lock_irq(&nvmeq->q_lock);
>> + if (nvmeq->q_suspended) {
>> + spin_unlock_irq(&nvmeq->q_lock);
>> + return -EBUSY;
>> + }
>>
>> + if (req->cmd_flags & REQ_DISCARD) {
>> + nvme_submit_discard(nvmeq, ns, req, iod);
>> + goto end_submit;
>> + }
>> + if (req->cmd_flags & REQ_FLUSH) {
>> + nvme_submit_flush(nvmeq, ns, req->tag);
>> + goto end_submit;
>> + }
>
> It would be nicer to have the locking and the the suspend check
> in the caller, and then branch out to one function for each type
> of request, especially as the caller already has special cases for
> discard and zero-payload requests anyway.
>
Ok, good idea.
>> +static int nvme_queue_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, struct request *req)
>> +{
>
> Can you call this nvme_queue_rq to match the method name? Makes
> grepping so much easier.. (ditto for the admin queue).
>
Yes
>> + struct nvme_ns *ns = hctx->queue->queuedata;
>> + struct nvme_queue *nvmeq = hctx->driver_data;
>>
>> + return nvme_submit_req_queue(nvmeq, ns, req);
>
> What's the point of the serparate nvme_submit_req_queue function?
>
Removed
>> spin_lock(&nvmeq->q_lock);
>> - nvme_process_cq(nvmeq);
>> - result = nvmeq->cqe_seen ? IRQ_HANDLED : IRQ_NONE;
>> - nvmeq->cqe_seen = 0;
>> + result = nvme_process_cq(nvmeq) ? IRQ_HANDLED : IRQ_NONE;
>
> No other caller checks the nvme_process_cq return value, so it might
> as well return the IRQ_ values directly.
Ok (it's been changed as cqe_seen had been mistakenly removed.)
>
>> +static struct blk_mq_ops nvme_mq_admin_ops = {
>> + .queue_rq = nvme_queue_admin_request,
>> + .map_queue = blk_mq_map_queue,
>> + .init_hctx = nvme_init_admin_hctx,
>> + .init_request = nvme_init_admin_request,
>> + .timeout = nvme_timeout,
>
> Care to name these nvme_admin_<methodname> for easier grep-ability?
Yes
>
>> +static int nvme_alloc_admin_tags(struct nvme_dev *dev)
>> +{
>> + if (!dev->admin_rq) {
>
> Why do you need the NULL check here?
the nvme_alloc_admin_tags is called both in nvme_dev_start and
nvme_dev_resume. To make sure we don't double allocated it check if its
already been allocated.
>
>> + dev->admin_tagset.reserved_tags = 1;
>
> What is the reserved tag for?
It was for flush. However, this way to do it has been removed in the
later series.
>
>> + dev->admin_rq = blk_mq_init_queue(&dev->admin_tagset);
>> + if (!dev->admin_rq) {
>> + memset(&dev->admin_tagset, 0,
>> + sizeof(dev->admin_tagset));
>> + blk_mq_free_tag_set(&dev->admin_tagset);
>
> Why do you zero the tagset here before freeing it?
>
Removed.
Thanks!
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Matias Bjørling" <m@bjorling.me>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: willy@linux.intel.com, keith.busch@intel.com,
sbradshaw@micron.com, axboe@kernel.dk,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] NVMe: basic conversion to blk-mq
Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 13:46:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <538C642B.3000107@bjorling.me> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140602100821.GB30612@infradead.org>
On 06/02/2014 12:08 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> +static int nvme_map_rq(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq, struct nvme_iod *iod,
>> + struct request *req, enum dma_data_direction dma_dir,
>> + int psegs)
>> {
>> sg_init_table(iod->sg, psegs);
>> + iod->nents = blk_rq_map_sg(req->q, req, iod->sg);
>>
>> + if (!dma_map_sg(nvmeq->q_dmadev, iod->sg, iod->nents, dma_dir))
>> return -ENOMEM;
>>
>> + return iod->nents;
>
> Given how simple I'd suggest merging this into the only caller.
Ok
>
>> +static int nvme_submit_iod(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq, struct nvme_iod *iod,
>> + struct nvme_ns *ns)
>> {
>> + struct request *req = iod->private;
>> struct nvme_command *cmnd;
>> + u16 control = 0;
>> + u32 dsmgmt = 0;
>>
>> + spin_lock_irq(&nvmeq->q_lock);
>> + if (nvmeq->q_suspended) {
>> + spin_unlock_irq(&nvmeq->q_lock);
>> + return -EBUSY;
>> + }
>>
>> + if (req->cmd_flags & REQ_DISCARD) {
>> + nvme_submit_discard(nvmeq, ns, req, iod);
>> + goto end_submit;
>> + }
>> + if (req->cmd_flags & REQ_FLUSH) {
>> + nvme_submit_flush(nvmeq, ns, req->tag);
>> + goto end_submit;
>> + }
>
> It would be nicer to have the locking and the the suspend check
> in the caller, and then branch out to one function for each type
> of request, especially as the caller already has special cases for
> discard and zero-payload requests anyway.
>
Ok, good idea.
>> +static int nvme_queue_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, struct request *req)
>> +{
>
> Can you call this nvme_queue_rq to match the method name? Makes
> grepping so much easier.. (ditto for the admin queue).
>
Yes
>> + struct nvme_ns *ns = hctx->queue->queuedata;
>> + struct nvme_queue *nvmeq = hctx->driver_data;
>>
>> + return nvme_submit_req_queue(nvmeq, ns, req);
>
> What's the point of the serparate nvme_submit_req_queue function?
>
Removed
>> spin_lock(&nvmeq->q_lock);
>> - nvme_process_cq(nvmeq);
>> - result = nvmeq->cqe_seen ? IRQ_HANDLED : IRQ_NONE;
>> - nvmeq->cqe_seen = 0;
>> + result = nvme_process_cq(nvmeq) ? IRQ_HANDLED : IRQ_NONE;
>
> No other caller checks the nvme_process_cq return value, so it might
> as well return the IRQ_ values directly.
Ok (it's been changed as cqe_seen had been mistakenly removed.)
>
>> +static struct blk_mq_ops nvme_mq_admin_ops = {
>> + .queue_rq = nvme_queue_admin_request,
>> + .map_queue = blk_mq_map_queue,
>> + .init_hctx = nvme_init_admin_hctx,
>> + .init_request = nvme_init_admin_request,
>> + .timeout = nvme_timeout,
>
> Care to name these nvme_admin_<methodname> for easier grep-ability?
Yes
>
>> +static int nvme_alloc_admin_tags(struct nvme_dev *dev)
>> +{
>> + if (!dev->admin_rq) {
>
> Why do you need the NULL check here?
the nvme_alloc_admin_tags is called both in nvme_dev_start and
nvme_dev_resume. To make sure we don't double allocated it check if its
already been allocated.
>
>> + dev->admin_tagset.reserved_tags = 1;
>
> What is the reserved tag for?
It was for flush. However, this way to do it has been removed in the
later series.
>
>> + dev->admin_rq = blk_mq_init_queue(&dev->admin_tagset);
>> + if (!dev->admin_rq) {
>> + memset(&dev->admin_tagset, 0,
>> + sizeof(dev->admin_tagset));
>> + blk_mq_free_tag_set(&dev->admin_tagset);
>
> Why do you zero the tagset here before freeing it?
>
Removed.
Thanks!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-02 11:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-29 21:51 [PATCH v4] basic conversion to blk-mq Matias Bjørling
2014-05-29 21:51 ` Matias Bjørling
2014-05-29 21:51 ` [PATCH v4] NVMe: " Matias Bjørling
2014-05-29 21:51 ` Matias Bjørling
2014-05-30 14:54 ` Matthew Wilcox
2014-05-30 14:54 ` Matthew Wilcox
2014-05-30 15:00 ` Matthew Wilcox
2014-05-30 15:00 ` Matthew Wilcox
2014-05-30 19:46 ` Jens Axboe
2014-05-30 19:46 ` Jens Axboe
2014-05-30 16:48 ` Keith Busch
2014-05-30 16:48 ` Keith Busch
2014-05-30 19:33 ` Matias Bjorling
2014-05-30 19:33 ` Matias Bjorling
2014-05-30 16:58 ` Matthew Wilcox
2014-05-30 16:58 ` Matthew Wilcox
2014-06-02 10:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-02 10:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-02 11:46 ` Matias Bjørling [this message]
2014-06-02 11:46 ` Matias Bjørling
2014-06-02 9:42 ` [PATCH v4] " Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-02 9:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-02 10:31 ` Matias Bjørling
2014-06-02 10:31 ` Matias Bjørling
2014-06-02 10:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-02 10:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=538C642B.3000107@bjorling.me \
--to=m@bjorling.me \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.