From: Jesse Barnes <jsbarnes@google.com>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Cc: Salman Qazi <sqazi@google.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
linux-block <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@google.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Limit number of items taken from the I/O scheduler in one go
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 13:13:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJmaN=m4sPCUjS1oy3yOavjN2wcwhMWvZE9sVehySuhibTmABQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAD=FV=WgfAgHSuDRXSUWFUV8CB3tPq7HG0+E7q2fRQniiJwa1w@mail.gmail.com>
Jens, Bart, Ming, any update here? Or is this already applied (I didn't check)?
Thanks,
Jesse
On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 9:43 AM Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 12:38 PM Salman Qazi <sqazi@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 12:19 PM Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2/7/20 10:45 AM, Salman Qazi wrote:
> > > > If I were to write this as a for-loop, it will look like this:
> > > >
> > > > for (i = 0; i == 0 || (run_again && i < 2); i++) {
> > > > /* another level of 8 character wide indentation */
> > > > run_again = false;
> > > > /* a bunch of code that possibly sets run_again to true
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > if (run_again)
> > > > blk_mq_run_hw_queue(hctx, true);
> > >
> > > That's not what I meant. What I meant is a loop that iterates at most
> > > two times and also to break out of the loop if run_again == false.
> > >
> >
> > I picked the most compact variant to demonstrate the problem. Adding
> > breaks isn't
> > really helping the readability.
> >
> > for (i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
> > run_again = false;
> > /* bunch of code that possibly sets it to true */
> > ...
> > if (!run_again)
> > break;
> > }
> > if (run_again)
> > blk_mq_run_hw_queue(hctx, true);
> >
> > When I read this, I initially assume that the loop in general runs
> > twice and that this is the common case. It has the
> > same problem with conveying intent. Perhaps, more importantly, the
> > point of using programming constructs is to shorten and simplify the
> > code.
> > There are still two if-statements in addition to the loop. We haven't
> > gained much by introducing the loop.
> >
> > > BTW, I share your concern about the additional indentation by eight
> > > positions. How about avoiding deeper indentation by introducing a new
> > > function?
> >
> > If there was a benefit to introducing the loop, this would be a good
> > call. But the way I see it, the introduction of another
> > function is yet another way in which the introduction of the loop
> > makes the code less readable.
> >
> > This is not a hill I want to die on. If the maintainer agrees with
> > you on this point, I will use a loop.
>
> I haven't done a massive amount of analysis of this patch, but since I
> noticed it while debugging my own block series I've been keeping track
> of it. Is there any status update here? We've been carrying this
> "FROMLIST" in our Chrome OS trees for a little while, but that's not a
> state we want to be in long-term. If it needs to spin before landing
> upstream we should get the spin out and land it. If it's OK as-is
> then it'd be nice to see it in mainline.
>
> From the above I guess Salman was waiting for Jens to weigh in with an
> opinion on the prefered bike shed color?
>
> -Doug
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-23 20:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-30 19:34 Hung tasks with multiple partitions Salman Qazi
2020-01-30 20:49 ` Bart Van Assche
2020-01-30 21:02 ` Salman Qazi
[not found] ` <20200203204554.119849-1-sqazi@google.com>
2020-02-03 20:59 ` [PATCH] block: Limit number of items taken from the I/O scheduler in one go Salman Qazi
2020-02-04 3:47 ` Bart Van Assche
2020-02-04 9:20 ` Ming Lei
2020-02-04 18:26 ` Salman Qazi
2020-02-04 19:37 ` Salman Qazi
2020-02-05 4:55 ` Ming Lei
2020-02-05 19:57 ` Salman Qazi
2020-02-06 10:18 ` Ming Lei
2020-02-06 21:12 ` Salman Qazi
2020-02-07 2:07 ` Ming Lei
2020-02-07 15:26 ` Bart Van Assche
2020-02-07 18:45 ` Salman Qazi
2020-02-07 19:04 ` Salman Qazi
2020-02-07 20:19 ` Bart Van Assche
2020-02-07 20:37 ` Salman Qazi
2020-04-20 16:42 ` Doug Anderson
2020-04-23 20:13 ` Jesse Barnes [this message]
2020-04-23 20:34 ` Jens Axboe
2020-04-23 20:40 ` Salman Qazi
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='CAJmaN=m4sPCUjS1oy3yOavjN2wcwhMWvZE9sVehySuhibTmABQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jsbarnes@google.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=gwendal@google.com \
--cc=hare@suse.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=sqazi@google.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).