From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D41FEC28B2B for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 17:55:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1351047AbiHSRzO (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2022 13:55:14 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39424 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1351220AbiHSRyu (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2022 13:54:50 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x436.google.com (mail-pf1-x436.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::436]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4389184ECC; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 10:35:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x436.google.com with SMTP id k14so4935413pfh.0; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 10:35:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:sender :from:to:cc; bh=HJOADyjEijTZgHMmhk5s3Tca02tMu8m4cNUu2EhYaAU=; b=fdmiJtb9RMBLJTQ+Xgl/kx6fm6FmEyy0L/lYlYxIWJX5k3m+R5z3YbZgU7aYih8WAc sAmQjBqm9+W17s6M38OvDRgjiaSaOqlC0SCu+JBOU3BI1QYBGiJOsQ+t76kaxgeBcVGJ NuCOoSKl8ukmGAzUbJrV5NkBVynK+S6LGQjUYKInpZa7u/wu9ffgjzLdBX0VsxlKllze 1VjABlNkXWdpcbqbtajq/AT7I3QwDIS9ZOX2ev3qXXy/waWCcM9UnVkD2OOyffE+BsUR ZRZQCqFQ25mZ5LqtHndedni2VRA0mWJ1bu8qjDcUWiWZEPkPcZiQmUfAl3l5vL+MdaJs 46vQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:sender :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=HJOADyjEijTZgHMmhk5s3Tca02tMu8m4cNUu2EhYaAU=; b=fMpIqFjexyWXUNpjOBoyThm/LCu/sacwSJruEYbesWRFU3J3dCvR5kz3iGVZF7hZGF 1t//iqk/lv37ZOqbj0yymmrD2F8YyqSM282mE1gBHqrbMx3NkJ37jEbxOAC+ojyhvjka W8zx3lt9KUMhVYzKRv4zdFb9hj5+bN69JITRyhPzNxt2+AoQmKrhPjC9KaE5zzdj3HdI ey9mr8rO98098U+7t4HHp1B00KTCgwO7NsAjlF84+NCSVOPt5TOEXpOY0GZaWuimkh47 ewiesEvhWlAUZFl/QMvhCrhP7wAjBeqJ4j7OHdf+lUlW4aCcLsYaZNDwieaa3+GOuNfk XW3Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo1yoItwAIg4zkUFZf5Nz2WnAoffiCJfdqDFysglCHtuxfltawdF ZCbHJBmD0AKjpfdAHedc8pBfRecml7o= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR4oZ1QImb2//4w2oB/fgGghUe4I3us2MzRuh0RNXn7NIGpxiEUSBf0ktiEmz2DtHEXYyrshdQ== X-Received: by 2002:a63:dc56:0:b0:419:e9df:28ce with SMTP id f22-20020a63dc56000000b00419e9df28cemr7006612pgj.48.1660930522661; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 10:35:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2620:10d:c090:400::5:db7d]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c9-20020a170902d48900b0016db43e5212sm3489712plg.175.2022.08.19.10.35.21 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 19 Aug 2022 10:35:22 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Tejun Heo Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 07:35:20 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Yu Kuai Cc: mkoutny@suse.com, axboe@kernel.dk, ming.lei@redhat.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yi.zhang@huawei.com, "yukuai (C)" Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 9/9] blk-throttle: clean up flag 'THROTL_TG_PENDING' Message-ID: References: <20220802140415.2960284-1-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> <20220802140415.2960284-10-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> <65d93ec6-2465-35f1-314f-f092ce631100@huaweicloud.com> <841b7b5a-b908-649a-c09d-32c8de5f1c14@huaweicloud.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <841b7b5a-b908-649a-c09d-32c8de5f1c14@huaweicloud.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 05:29:39PM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote: > Hi, Tejun! > > 在 2022/08/18 1:54, Tejun Heo 写道: > > Hello, > > > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 09:45:13AM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote: > > > > I don't know whether this is better or not. It's minutely less lines of code > > > > but also makes the code a bit more fragile. I'm ambivalent. At any rate, > > > > please move these trivial patches to the head of the series or post them > > > > separately. > > > > > > Can I ask why do you think this patch makes the code a bit more fragile? > > > > It's just one step further removed. Before, the flag was trivially in sync > > with the on queue status. After, the relationship is more indirect and > > easier to break accidentally. Not that it's a major problem. Just not sure > > what the benefit of the change is. > > If you are worried about that, I can keep the flag, then the last two > patches will cleanup: I wasn't necessarily worried. It's more that I couldn't tell why the code is better afterwards. Maybe update the commit message to explain why the new code is better? Thanks. -- tejun