* clean up bio merge conditions
@ 2024-11-19 16:11 Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-19 16:11 ` [PATCH 1/2] block: don't bother checking the data direction for merges Christoph Hellwig
` (4 more replies)
0 siblings, 5 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2024-11-19 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jens Axboe; +Cc: linux-block
Hi Jens,
Dan's smatch run pointed out that there is no need to check for a NULL
req->bio in the merge bio into request and request merge helpers
because they can't ever be reached by flush or passthrough requests.
While validing that I also found a few other odd bits directly next
to it, so this two-patch series fixes all of that.
Diffstat:
blk-merge.c | 35 +++++++----------------------------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 1/2] block: don't bother checking the data direction for merges
2024-11-19 16:11 clean up bio merge conditions Christoph Hellwig
@ 2024-11-19 16:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-19 16:48 ` John Garry
2024-11-19 16:11 ` [PATCH 2/2] block: req->bio is always set in the merge code Christoph Hellwig
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2024-11-19 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jens Axboe; +Cc: linux-block
Because it already is encoded in the opcode.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
---
block/blk-merge.c | 7 -------
1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
index e0b28e9298c9..64860cbd5e27 100644
--- a/block/blk-merge.c
+++ b/block/blk-merge.c
@@ -864,9 +864,6 @@ static struct request *attempt_merge(struct request_queue *q,
if (req_op(req) != req_op(next))
return NULL;
- if (rq_data_dir(req) != rq_data_dir(next))
- return NULL;
-
if (req->bio && next->bio) {
/* Don't merge requests with different write hints. */
if (req->bio->bi_write_hint != next->bio->bi_write_hint)
@@ -986,10 +983,6 @@ bool blk_rq_merge_ok(struct request *rq, struct bio *bio)
if (req_op(rq) != bio_op(bio))
return false;
- /* different data direction or already started, don't merge */
- if (bio_data_dir(bio) != rq_data_dir(rq))
- return false;
-
/* don't merge across cgroup boundaries */
if (!blk_cgroup_mergeable(rq, bio))
return false;
--
2.45.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] block: req->bio is always set in the merge code
2024-11-19 16:11 clean up bio merge conditions Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-19 16:11 ` [PATCH 1/2] block: don't bother checking the data direction for merges Christoph Hellwig
@ 2024-11-19 16:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-19 16:59 ` John Garry
2024-11-19 16:36 ` clean up bio merge conditions Martin K. Petersen
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2024-11-19 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jens Axboe; +Cc: linux-block, Dan Carpenter
As smatch, which is a lot smarter than me noticed. So remove the checks
for it, and condense these checks a bit including the comments stating
the obvious.
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
---
block/blk-merge.c | 30 ++++++++----------------------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
index 64860cbd5e27..e01383c6e534 100644
--- a/block/blk-merge.c
+++ b/block/blk-merge.c
@@ -864,14 +864,10 @@ static struct request *attempt_merge(struct request_queue *q,
if (req_op(req) != req_op(next))
return NULL;
- if (req->bio && next->bio) {
- /* Don't merge requests with different write hints. */
- if (req->bio->bi_write_hint != next->bio->bi_write_hint)
- return NULL;
- if (req->bio->bi_ioprio != next->bio->bi_ioprio)
- return NULL;
- }
-
+ if (req->bio->bi_write_hint != next->bio->bi_write_hint)
+ return NULL;
+ if (req->bio->bi_ioprio != next->bio->bi_ioprio)
+ return NULL;
if (!blk_atomic_write_mergeable_rqs(req, next))
return NULL;
@@ -983,26 +979,16 @@ bool blk_rq_merge_ok(struct request *rq, struct bio *bio)
if (req_op(rq) != bio_op(bio))
return false;
- /* don't merge across cgroup boundaries */
if (!blk_cgroup_mergeable(rq, bio))
return false;
-
- /* only merge integrity protected bio into ditto rq */
if (blk_integrity_merge_bio(rq->q, rq, bio) == false)
return false;
-
- /* Only merge if the crypt contexts are compatible */
if (!bio_crypt_rq_ctx_compatible(rq, bio))
return false;
-
- if (rq->bio) {
- /* Don't merge requests with different write hints. */
- if (rq->bio->bi_write_hint != bio->bi_write_hint)
- return false;
- if (rq->bio->bi_ioprio != bio->bi_ioprio)
- return false;
- }
-
+ if (rq->bio->bi_write_hint != bio->bi_write_hint)
+ return false;
+ if (rq->bio->bi_ioprio != bio->bi_ioprio)
+ return false;
if (blk_atomic_write_mergeable_rq_bio(rq, bio) == false)
return false;
--
2.45.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: clean up bio merge conditions
2024-11-19 16:11 clean up bio merge conditions Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-19 16:11 ` [PATCH 1/2] block: don't bother checking the data direction for merges Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-19 16:11 ` [PATCH 2/2] block: req->bio is always set in the merge code Christoph Hellwig
@ 2024-11-19 16:36 ` Martin K. Petersen
2024-11-19 16:56 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2024-11-20 2:07 ` Jens Axboe
4 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Martin K. Petersen @ 2024-11-19 16:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: Jens Axboe, linux-block
Christoph,
> Dan's smatch run pointed out that there is no need to check for a NULL
> req->bio in the merge bio into request and request merge helpers
> because they can't ever be reached by flush or passthrough requests.
>
> While validing that I also found a few other odd bits directly next
> to it, so this two-patch series fixes all of that.
Reviewed-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
--
Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: don't bother checking the data direction for merges
2024-11-19 16:11 ` [PATCH 1/2] block: don't bother checking the data direction for merges Christoph Hellwig
@ 2024-11-19 16:48 ` John Garry
2024-11-19 16:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: John Garry @ 2024-11-19 16:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christoph Hellwig, Jens Axboe; +Cc: linux-block
On 19/11/2024 16:11, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Because it already is encoded in the opcode.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> ---
> block/blk-merge.c | 7 -------
> 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
> index e0b28e9298c9..64860cbd5e27 100644
> --- a/block/blk-merge.c
> +++ b/block/blk-merge.c
> @@ -864,9 +864,6 @@ static struct request *attempt_merge(struct request_queue *q,
> if (req_op(req) != req_op(next))
> return NULL;
>
> - if (rq_data_dir(req) != rq_data_dir(next))
> - return NULL;
> -
> if (req->bio && next->bio) {
> /* Don't merge requests with different write hints. */
> if (req->bio->bi_write_hint != next->bio->bi_write_hint)
> @@ -986,10 +983,6 @@ bool blk_rq_merge_ok(struct request *rq, struct bio *bio)
> if (req_op(rq) != bio_op(bio))
> return false;
>
> - /* different data direction or already started, don't merge */
I tried to check what is meant by "already started", but that comment
pre-dates git. And even the code from then does not make it obvious, but
I don't want to check further, so:
Reviewed-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
> - if (bio_data_dir(bio) != rq_data_dir(rq))
> - return false;
> -
> /* don't merge across cgroup boundaries */
> if (!blk_cgroup_mergeable(rq, bio))
> return false;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: don't bother checking the data direction for merges
2024-11-19 16:48 ` John Garry
@ 2024-11-19 16:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2024-11-19 16:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: John Garry; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Jens Axboe, linux-block
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 04:48:15PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
> I tried to check what is meant by "already started", but that comment
> pre-dates git. And even the code from then does not make it obvious, but I
> don't want to check further, so:
Back in the bad old days there was a separare prep_fn callback into
the driver to prepare a request while it was still on the scheduler
lists, and that then set a started flag. In other words the comment
is long obsolete.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: clean up bio merge conditions
2024-11-19 16:11 clean up bio merge conditions Christoph Hellwig
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2024-11-19 16:36 ` clean up bio merge conditions Martin K. Petersen
@ 2024-11-19 16:56 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2024-11-20 2:07 ` Jens Axboe
4 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Johannes Thumshirn @ 2024-11-19 16:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: hch, Jens Axboe; +Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org
For the series,
Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] block: req->bio is always set in the merge code
2024-11-19 16:11 ` [PATCH 2/2] block: req->bio is always set in the merge code Christoph Hellwig
@ 2024-11-19 16:59 ` John Garry
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: John Garry @ 2024-11-19 16:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christoph Hellwig, Jens Axboe; +Cc: linux-block, Dan Carpenter
On 19/11/2024 16:11, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> As smatch, which is a lot smarter than me noticed. So remove the checks
> for it, and condense these checks a bit including the comments stating
> the obvious.
>
> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter<dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig<hch@lst.de>
> ---
Reviewed-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: clean up bio merge conditions
2024-11-19 16:11 clean up bio merge conditions Christoph Hellwig
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2024-11-19 16:56 ` Johannes Thumshirn
@ 2024-11-20 2:07 ` Jens Axboe
4 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2024-11-20 2:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: linux-block
On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 17:11:49 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Dan's smatch run pointed out that there is no need to check for a NULL
> req->bio in the merge bio into request and request merge helpers
> because they can't ever be reached by flush or passthrough requests.
>
> While validing that I also found a few other odd bits directly next
> to it, so this two-patch series fixes all of that.
>
> [...]
Applied, thanks!
[1/2] block: don't bother checking the data direction for merges
commit: 9f8d68283342a48f692f2c02231318bb4a7b207f
[2/2] block: req->bio is always set in the merge code
commit: 81314bfbde9d089fa2318adba54891dfaadb1c05
Best regards,
--
Jens Axboe
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-11-20 2:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-11-19 16:11 clean up bio merge conditions Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-19 16:11 ` [PATCH 1/2] block: don't bother checking the data direction for merges Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-19 16:48 ` John Garry
2024-11-19 16:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-19 16:11 ` [PATCH 2/2] block: req->bio is always set in the merge code Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-19 16:59 ` John Garry
2024-11-19 16:36 ` clean up bio merge conditions Martin K. Petersen
2024-11-19 16:56 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2024-11-20 2:07 ` Jens Axboe
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).