linux-block.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 03/11] block: Introduce op_is_zoned_write()
Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 08:45:56 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230517064556.GA24536@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3cba6052-69ed-4ec4-dcbb-c0347a9ebd48@acm.org>

On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 05:00:29PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 5/16/23 16:30, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> Or if you really want to rewrite this, may be something like:
>>
>> static inline bool bdev_op_is_zoned_write(struct block_device *bdev,
>>    					  enum req_op op)
>> {
>> 	return bdev_is_zoned(bdev) &&
>> 	       (op == REQ_OP_WRITE || op == REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES);
>> }
>>
>> which is very easy to understand.
>
> The op_is_zoned_write() function was introduced to use it in patch 4/11 of 
> this series. Anyway, I will look into open-coding it.

I think the idea here is that we're testing for an operation that needs
zone locking.  Maybe that needs to be reflected in the name?
op_needs_zone_write_locking() ?

  reply	other threads:[~2023-05-17  6:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-16 22:33 [PATCH v5 00/11] mq-deadline: Improve support for zoned block devices Bart Van Assche
2023-05-16 22:33 ` [PATCH v5 01/11] block: Simplify blk_req_needs_zone_write_lock() Bart Van Assche
2023-05-16 23:23   ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-17  7:36   ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-05-17 10:00   ` Johannes Thumshirn
2023-05-16 22:33 ` [PATCH v5 02/11] block: Fix the type of the second bdev_op_is_zoned_write() argument Bart Van Assche
2023-05-16 23:26   ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-17  7:37   ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-05-16 22:33 ` [PATCH v5 03/11] block: Introduce op_is_zoned_write() Bart Van Assche
2023-05-16 23:30   ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-17  0:00     ` Bart Van Assche
2023-05-17  6:45       ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2023-05-17  6:47         ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-17  7:37   ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-05-16 22:33 ` [PATCH v5 04/11] block: Introduce blk_rq_is_seq_zoned_write() Bart Van Assche
2023-05-17  0:01   ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-17  7:38   ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-05-17 10:02   ` Johannes Thumshirn
2023-05-16 22:33 ` [PATCH v5 05/11] block: mq-deadline: Clean up deadline_check_fifo() Bart Van Assche
2023-05-17  1:02   ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-17 15:01     ` Bart Van Assche
2023-05-17 22:07       ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-17  7:39   ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-05-16 22:33 ` [PATCH v5 06/11] block: mq-deadline: Simplify deadline_skip_seq_writes() Bart Van Assche
2023-05-17  7:40   ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-05-16 22:33 ` [PATCH v5 07/11] block: mq-deadline: Improve deadline_skip_seq_writes() Bart Van Assche
2023-05-17  1:06   ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-17 16:30     ` Bart Van Assche
2023-05-17 22:15       ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-18 18:48         ` Bart Van Assche
2023-05-17  7:41   ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-05-17  7:55     ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-16 22:33 ` [PATCH v5 08/11] block: mq-deadline: Reduce lock contention Bart Van Assche
2023-05-17  1:07   ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-17  6:46   ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-17  7:42   ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-05-16 22:33 ` [PATCH v5 09/11] block: mq-deadline: Track the dispatch position Bart Van Assche
2023-05-17  1:13   ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-17  7:45   ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-05-16 22:33 ` [PATCH v5 10/11] block: mq-deadline: Handle requeued requests correctly Bart Van Assche
2023-05-17  1:22   ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-17 16:28     ` Bart Van Assche
2023-05-17 22:05       ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-18 12:58       ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-17  7:46   ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-05-16 22:33 ` [PATCH v5 11/11] block: mq-deadline: Fix handling of at-head zoned writes Bart Van Assche
2023-05-17  1:24   ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-17  7:47   ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-05-17  7:53     ` Damien Le Moal
2023-05-17 17:13     ` Bart Van Assche

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=20230517064556.GA24536@lst.de \
    --to=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
    --cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).