Re: [PATCH 1/4] block: remove REQ_ATOM_POLL_SLEPT

2018-01-10 Thread Omar Sandoval
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 05:29:24PM -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

Re: [PATCH 1/4] block: remove REQ_ATOM_POLL_SLEPT

2018-01-10 Thread Jens Axboe
On 1/10/18 11:25 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > 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 >>

Re: [PATCH 1/4] block: remove REQ_ATOM_POLL_SLEPT

2018-01-10 Thread Bart Van Assche
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

[PATCH 1/4] block: remove REQ_ATOM_POLL_SLEPT

2018-01-09 Thread Jens Axboe
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. Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe ---

[PATCH 1/4] block: remove REQ_ATOM_POLL_SLEPT

2018-01-09 Thread Jens Axboe
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. Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe ---