Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] blk-mq-sched: refactor __blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 7/30/25 1:22 AM, Yu Kuai wrote:
Introduce struct sched_dispatch_ctx, and split the helper into
elevator_dispatch_one_request() and elevator_finish_dispatch(). Also
and comments about the non-error return value.

and -> add

+struct sched_dispatch_ctx {
+	struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx;
+	struct elevator_queue *e;
+	struct request_queue *q;

'e' is always equal to q->elevator so I'm not sure whether it's worth to
have the member 'e'?

+static bool elevator_can_dispatch(struct sched_dispatch_ctx *ctx)
+{
+	if (ctx->e->type->ops.has_work &&
+	    !ctx->e->type->ops.has_work(ctx->hctx))
+		return false;
- if (!list_empty_careful(&hctx->dispatch)) {
-			busy = true;
-			break;
-		}
+	if (!list_empty_careful(&ctx->hctx->dispatch)) {
+		ctx->busy = true;
+		return false;
+	}
- budget_token = blk_mq_get_dispatch_budget(q);
-		if (budget_token < 0)
-			break;
+	return true;
+}

Shouldn't all function names in this file start with the blk_mq_ prefix?

Additionally, please rename elevator_can_dispatch() into
elevator_should_dispatch(). I think the latter name better reflects the
purpose of this function.

+	if (sq_sched)
+		spin_lock_irq(&ctx->e->lock);
+	rq = ctx->e->type->ops.dispatch_request(ctx->hctx);
+	if (sq_sched)
+		spin_unlock_irq(&ctx->e->lock);

Same comment here as on patch 1/5: code like the above makes it
harder than necessary for static analyzers to verify this code.

+ if (!rq) {
+		blk_mq_put_dispatch_budget(ctx->q, budget_token);
  		/*
-		 * If we cannot get tag for the request, stop dequeueing
-		 * requests from the IO scheduler. We are unlikely to be able
-		 * to submit them anyway and it creates false impression for
-		 * scheduling heuristics that the device can take more IO.
+		 * We're releasing without dispatching. Holding the
+		 * budget could have blocked any "hctx"s with the
+		 * same queue and if we didn't dispatch then there's
+		 * no guarantee anyone will kick the queue.  Kick it
+		 * ourselves.
  		 */

Please keep the original comment. To me the new comment seems less clear
than the existing comment.

+static int __blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
+{
+	unsigned int max_dispatch;
+	struct sched_dispatch_ctx ctx = {
+		.hctx	= hctx,
+		.q	= hctx->queue,
+		.e	= hctx->queue->elevator,
+	};
+
+	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ctx.rq_list);

Please remove the INIT_LIST_HEAD() invocation and add the following in
the ctx declaration:

	.rq_list = LIST_HEAD_INIT(ctx.rq_list),

This is a common pattern in kernel code. The following grep command
yields about 200 results:

$ git grep -nH '= LIST_HEAD_INIT.*\.'

Otherwise this patch looks good to me.

Thanks,

Bart.




[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [IDE]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux