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: 22+ 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
2021-12-27 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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.