From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1755200AbZEVGob@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755200AbZEVGob (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 22 May 2009 02:44:31 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751375AbZEVGoX
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Fri, 22 May 2009 02:44:23 -0400
Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([222.73.24.84]:55452 "EHLO song.cn.fujitsu.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751368AbZEVGoW (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 22 May 2009 02:44:22 -0400
Message-ID: <4A164978.1020604@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 14:43:04 +0800
From: Gui Jianfeng <guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (Windows/20070716)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
CC: nauman@google.com, dpshah@google.com, lizf@cn.fujitsu.com,
       mikew@google.com, fchecconi@gmail.com, paolo.valente@unimore.it,
       jens.axboe@oracle.com, ryov@valinux.co.jp, fernando@oss.ntt.co.jp,
       s-uchida@ap.jp.nec.com, taka@valinux.co.jp, jmoyer@redhat.com,
       dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
       righi.andrea@gmail.com, agk@redhat.com, dm-devel@redhat.com,
       snitzer@redhat.com, m-ikeda@ds.jp.nec.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/18] io-controller: Common flat fair queuing code in
 elevaotor layer
References: <1241553525-28095-1-git-send-email-vgoyal@redhat.com> <1241553525-28095-3-git-send-email-vgoyal@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <1241553525-28095-3-git-send-email-vgoyal@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Vivek Goyal wrote:
...
> +/* A request got completed from io_queue. Do the accounting. */
> +void elv_ioq_completed_request(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq)
> +{
> +	const int sync = rq_is_sync(rq);
> +	struct io_queue *ioq = rq->ioq;
> +	struct elv_fq_data *efqd = &q->elevator->efqd;
> +
> +	if (!elv_iosched_fair_queuing_enabled(q->elevator))
> +		return;
> +
> +	elv_log_ioq(efqd, ioq, "complete");
> +
> +	elv_update_hw_tag(efqd);
> +
> +	WARN_ON(!efqd->rq_in_driver);
> +	WARN_ON(!ioq->dispatched);
> +	efqd->rq_in_driver--;
> +	ioq->dispatched--;
> +
> +	if (sync)
> +		ioq->last_end_request = jiffies;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If this is the active queue, check if it needs to be expired,
> +	 * or if we want to idle in case it has no pending requests.
> +	 */
> +
> +	if (elv_active_ioq(q->elevator) == ioq) {
> +		if (elv_ioq_slice_new(ioq)) {
> +			elv_ioq_set_prio_slice(q, ioq);

  Hi Vivek,

  Would you explain a bit why slice_end should be set when first request completes.
  Why not set it just when an ioq gets active?
  
  Thanks.
  Gui Jianfeng