On 9/30/19 2:12 PM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 30/09/2019 22:53, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> On 9/30/19 12:43 PM, Pavel Begunkov (Silence) wrote:
>>> @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ static bool bt_tags_iter(struct sbitmap *bitmap,
>>> unsigned int bitnr, void *data)
>>> * test and set the bit before assining ->rqs[].
>>> */
>>> rq = tags->rqs[bitnr];
>>> - if (rq && blk_mq_request_started(rq))
>>> + if (rq && blk_mq_rq_state(rq) != MQ_RQ_IDLE)
>>> return iter_data->fn(rq, iter_data->data, reserved);
>>>
>>> return true>
>>> @@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ static bool blk_mq_tagset_count_completed_rqs(struct
>>> request *rq,
>>> {
>>> unsigned *count = data;
>>>
>>> - if (blk_mq_request_completed(rq))
>>> + if (blk_mq_rq_state(rq) == MQ_RQ_COMPLETE)
>>> (*count)++;
>>> return true;
>>> }
>>
>> Changes like the above significantly reduce readability of the code in
>> the block layer core. I don't like this. I think this patch is a step
>> backwards instead of a step forwards.
>
> Yep, looks too bulky.
>
> Jens, could you consider the first version?
Yes, first one is fine, I have applied it. Thanks.
--
Jens Axboe
