On Fri, 2018-08-10 at 09:59 +0800, jianchao.wang wrote: > On 08/10/2018 03:41 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > Instead of scheduling runtime resume of a request queue after a > > request has been queued, schedule asynchronous resume during request > > allocation. The new pm_request_resume() calls occur after > > blk_queue_enter() has increased the q_usage_counter request queue > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > member. This change is needed for a later patch that will make request > > allocation block while the queue status is not RPM_ACTIVE. > > Is it "after getting q->q_usage_counter fails" ? > And also this blk_pm_request_resume will not affect the normal path. ;)
Right, the commit message needs to be brought in sync with the code. Bart.
