[PATCH 16/19] staging: lustre: use explicit poll loop in ptlrpc_unregister_reply

NeilBrown
2018-01-08T03:31:11Z

replace l_wait_event() with wait_event_idle_timeout() and explicit
loop. This approach is easier to understand.

Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
---
drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/client.c | 14 +++++++-------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/client.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/client.c
index f70176c6db08..ffdd3ffd62c6 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/client.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/client.c
@@ -2500,7 +2500,6 @@ static int ptlrpc_unregister_reply(struct ptlrpc_request *request, int async)
{
int rc;
wait_queue_head_t *wq;
- struct l_wait_info lwi;

/* Might sleep. */
LASSERT(!in_interrupt());
@@ -2543,16 +2542,17 @@ static int ptlrpc_unregister_reply(struct ptlrpc_request *request, int async)
* Network access will complete in finite time but the HUGE
* timeout lets us CWARN for visibility of sluggish NALs
*/
- lwi = LWI_TIMEOUT_INTERVAL(LONG_UNLINK * HZ,
- HZ, NULL, NULL);
- rc = l_wait_event(*wq, !ptlrpc_client_recv_or_unlink(request),
- &lwi);
- if (rc == 0) {
+ int cnt = 0;
+ while (cnt < LONG_UNLINK &&
+ (rc = wait_event_idle_timeout(*wq,
+ !ptlrpc_client_recv_or_unlink(request),
+ HZ)) == 0)
+ cnt += 1;
+ if (rc > 0) {
ptlrpc_rqphase_move(request, request->rq_next_phase);
return 1;
}

- LASSERT(rc == -ETIMEDOUT);
DEBUG_REQ(D_WARNING, request,
"Unexpectedly long timeout receiving_reply=%d req_ulinked=%d reply_unlinked=%d",
request->rq_receiving_reply,