From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from esa5.hgst.iphmx.com ([216.71.153.144]:58646 "EHLO esa5.hgst.iphmx.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751180AbdFEVbN (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jun 2017 17:31:13 -0400 From: Bart Van Assche To: "hch@infradead.org" , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "axboe@fb.com" , "ming.lei@redhat.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 04/11] blk-mq: introduce blk_mq_unquiesce_queue Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 21:31:10 +0000 Message-ID: <1496698269.2623.26.camel@sandisk.com> References: <20170605155925.7896-1-ming.lei@redhat.com> <20170605155925.7896-5-ming.lei@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20170605155925.7896-5-ming.lei@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 23:59 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > blk_mq_start_stopped_hw_queues() is used implictely ^^^^^^^^^^ implicitly? > as counterpart of blk_mq_quiesce_queue() for unquiescing queue, > so we introduce blk_mq_unquiesce_queue() and make it > as counterpart of blk_mq_quiesce_queue() explicitely. ^^^^^^^^^^^ explicitly? Anyway: Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche