From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
axboe@kernel.dk, hch@lst.de, sagi@grimberg.me
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 3/3] nvme-pci: fix queue_rqs list splitting
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2021 18:46:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211229174602.GC28058@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211227164138.2488066-3-kbusch@kernel.org>
> + rq_list_move(rqlist, &requeue_list, req, prev, next);
> +
> + req = prev;
> + if (!req)
> + continue;
Shouldn't this be a break?
> + *rqlist = next;
> + prev = NULL;
> + } else
> + prev = req;
> + }
I wonder if a restart label here would be a little cleaner, something
like:
diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c b/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
index 992ee314e91ba..29b433fd12bdd 100644
--- a/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
+++ b/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
@@ -999,9 +999,11 @@ static bool nvme_prep_rq_batch(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq, struct request *req)
static void nvme_queue_rqs(struct request **rqlist)
{
- struct request *req, *next, *prev = NULL;
+ struct request *req, *next, *prev;
struct request *requeue_list = NULL;
+restart:
+ prev = NULL;
rq_list_for_each_safe(rqlist, req, next) {
struct nvme_queue *nvmeq = req->mq_hctx->driver_data;
@@ -1009,9 +1011,9 @@ static void nvme_queue_rqs(struct request **rqlist)
/* detach 'req' and add to remainder list */
rq_list_move(rqlist, &requeue_list, req, prev, next);
+ if (!prev)
+ break;
req = prev;
- if (!req)
- continue;
}
if (!next || req->mq_hctx != next->mq_hctx) {
@@ -1019,9 +1021,9 @@ static void nvme_queue_rqs(struct request **rqlist)
req->rq_next = NULL;
nvme_submit_cmds(nvmeq, rqlist);
*rqlist = next;
- prev = NULL;
- } else
- prev = req;
+ goto restart;
+ }
+ prev = req;
}
*rqlist = requeue_list;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-29 17:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-27 16:41 [PATCHv2 1/3] block: introduce rq_list_for_each_safe macro Keith Busch
2021-12-27 16:41 ` [PATCHv2 2/3] block: introduce rq_list_move Keith Busch
2021-12-27 18:49 ` kernel test robot
2021-12-29 17:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-12-29 20:59 ` Keith Busch
2021-12-27 16:41 ` [PATCHv2 3/3] nvme-pci: fix queue_rqs list splitting Keith Busch
2021-12-29 17:46 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2021-12-29 21:04 ` Keith Busch
2021-12-30 7:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-01-04 19:38 ` Keith Busch
2022-01-05 7:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-12-29 17:39 ` [PATCHv2 1/3] block: introduce rq_list_for_each_safe macro Christoph Hellwig
2021-12-29 20:57 ` Keith Busch
2021-12-30 14:38 ` Max Gurtovoy
2021-12-30 15:30 ` Keith Busch
2022-01-03 15:23 ` Max Gurtovoy
2022-01-03 18:15 ` Keith Busch
2022-01-04 12:15 ` Max Gurtovoy
2022-01-05 17:26 ` Keith Busch
2022-01-06 11:54 ` Max Gurtovoy
2022-01-06 13:41 ` Jens Axboe
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=20211229174602.GC28058@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.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