Re: [PATCH 7/7] blk-mq: don't use the requeue list to queue flush commands

From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>, linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] blk-mq: don't use the requeue list to queue flush commands
Date: Fri, 19 May 2023 12:55:45 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <36dbbde0-e7f4-c1bd-8015-6265ac812786@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230519044050.107790-8-hch@lst.de>

On 5/18/23 21:40, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Currently both requeues of commands that were already sent to the
> driver and flush commands submitted from the flush state machine
> share the same requeue_list struct request_queue, despite requeues
> doing head insertations and flushes not.  Switch to using two
> separate lists instead.

insertations -> insertions. See also https://www.google.com/search?q=insertation.

> @@ -1434,13 +1437,16 @@ static void blk_mq_requeue_work(struct work_struct *work)
>   	struct request_queue *q =
>   		container_of(work, struct request_queue, requeue_work.work);
>   	LIST_HEAD(rq_list);
> -	struct request *rq, *next;
> +	LIST_HEAD(flush_list);
> +	struct request *rq;
>   
>   	spin_lock_irq(&q->requeue_lock);
>   	list_splice_init(&q->requeue_list, &rq_list);
> +	list_splice_init(&q->flush_list, &flush_list);
>   	spin_unlock_irq(&q->requeue_lock);

"rq_list" stands for "request_list". That name is now confusing since this patch
add a second request list (flush_list).

Otherwise this patch looks good to me.

Thanks,

Bart.