[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <af41c7c40906161244q61fd47c5u1a10243c8839938@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 12:44:58 -0700
From: Divyesh Shah <dpshah@...gle.com>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
jens.axboe@...cle.com, nauman@...gle.com, lizf@...fujitsu.com,
mikew@...gle.com, fchecconi@...il.com, paolo.valente@...more.it,
ryov@...inux.co.jp, fernando@....ntt.co.jp, s-uchida@...jp.nec.com,
taka@...inux.co.jp, guijianfeng@...fujitsu.com, jmoyer@...hat.com,
dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
righi.andrea@...il.com, m-ikeda@...jp.nec.com, jbaron@...hat.com,
agk@...hat.com, snitzer@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/19] io-controller: Common flat fair queuing code in
elevaotor layer
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Vivek Goyal<vgoyal@...hat.com> wrote:
> void elv_deactivate_ioq(struct elv_fq_data *efqd, struct io_queue *ioq,
> + int requeue)
> +{
> + if (ioq == efqd->active_queue)
> + elv_reset_active_ioq(efqd);
> +
> + bfq_deactivate_entity(&ioq->entity, requeue);
> +}
The check for ioq == efqd->active_queue and the call to
elv_reset_active_ioq() seem to be unnecessary. This gets called from
elv_del_ioq_busy() which has 2 callers which:
- either explicitly check for ioq != efqd->active_queue
- or call elv_reset_active_ioq() right before invoking this function
This was needed earlier as the io_ioq_move() function didn't fall in
one of the 2 categories above. This has been done away with the ref
counting patch, AFAICT.
-Divyesh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists