On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 17:29 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > We don't need this to be an atomic flag, it can be a regular > flag. We either end up on the same CPU for the polling, in which > case the state is sane, or we did the sleep which would imply > the needed barrier to ensure we see the right state.
Please consider updating rqf_name[] in blk-mq-debugfs.c. Anyway: Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanass...@wdc.com>
