From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40754 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751104AbdEaJwJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 May 2017 05:52:09 -0400 Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 17:51:57 +0800 From: Ming Lei To: Bart Van Assche Cc: "hch@infradead.org" , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "axboe@fb.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/8] blk-mq: update comments on blk_mq_quiesce_queue() Message-ID: <20170531095156.GA14109@ming.t460p> References: <20170527142126.26079-1-ming.lei@redhat.com> <20170527142126.26079-6-ming.lei@redhat.com> <1496164482.2627.13.camel@sandisk.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1496164482.2627.13.camel@sandisk.com> Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 05:14:44PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Sat, 2017-05-27 at 22:21 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > /** > > - * blk_mq_quiesce_queue() - wait until all ongoing queue_rq calls have finished > > + * blk_mq_quiesce_queue() - wait until all ongoing dispatching have finished > > * @q: request queue. > > * > > Hello Ming, > > The concept of dispatching does not have a meaning to block driver authors who are > not familiar with the block layer internals. However, every author of a blk-mq driver > knows what the .queue_rq() function is. Unfortunately it isn't enough to just block .queue_rq(), did you read the commit log? > Additionally, the new comment is grammatically > incorrect. > So the above change looks like a step in the wrong direction to me. Sorry, I simply don't agree, and we have to make it explicit. -- Ming