From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Cc: bijan.mottahedeh@oracle.com, hch@lst.de,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, sagi@grimberg.me
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] nvme-pci: Remove tag from process cq
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 17:05:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200304160518.GA11029@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200302194616.2432-2-kbusch@kernel.org>
On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 11:46:15AM -0800, Keith Busch wrote:
> The only user for tagged completion was for timeout handling. That user,
> though, really only cares if the timed out command is completed, which
> we can safely check within the timeout handler.
>
> Remove the tag check to simplify completion handling.
>
> Signed-off-by: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
> ---
> drivers/nvme/host/pci.c | 22 +++++++++++-----------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c b/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
> index da392b50f73e..db84283f2a5a 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
> @@ -991,14 +991,13 @@ static inline void nvme_update_cq_head(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq)
> }
>
> static inline int nvme_process_cq(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq, u16 *start,
> - u16 *end, unsigned int tag)
> + u16 *end)
> {
> int found = 0;
>
> *start = nvmeq->cq_head;
> while (nvme_cqe_pending(nvmeq)) {
> - if (tag == -1U || nvmeq->cqes[nvmeq->cq_head].command_id == tag)
> - found++;
> + ++found;
Any reason for moving from found++ to ++found? I always find the infix
notation a little odd when there is no need for it, but that is just a
personal preference.
> */
> - if (nvme_poll_irqdisable(nvmeq, req->tag)) {
> + if (nvme_poll_irqdisable(nvmeq) &&
> + blk_mq_request_completed(req)) {
Do we need to check the nvme_poll_irqdisable value here? If it got
completed by other means we should be fine too, shouldn't we?
_______________________________________________
linux-nvme mailing list
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-04 16:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-02 19:46 [PATCH 0/2] nvme-pci: Simpler completions Keith Busch
2020-03-02 19:46 ` [PATCH 1/2] nvme-pci: Remove tag from process cq Keith Busch
2020-03-04 16:05 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2020-03-04 16:45 ` Keith Busch
2020-03-02 19:46 ` [PATCH 2/2] nvme-pci: Remove two-pass completions Keith Busch
2020-03-04 16:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-03-05 20:52 ` Sagi Grimberg
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=20200304160518.GA11029@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=bijan.mottahedeh@oracle.com \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/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