linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block: Remove the extra check in queue_requests

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:51:23 +0200
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	Tao Ma <tm@....ma>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Remove the extra check in queue_requests_store.

On 2011-04-19 10:26, Tao Ma wrote:
> From: Tao Ma <boyu.mt@...bao.com>
> 
> In queue_requests_store, the code looks like
> 	if (rl->count[BLK_RW_SYNC] >= q->nr_requests) {
> 		blk_set_queue_full(q, BLK_RW_SYNC);
> 	} else if (rl->count[BLK_RW_SYNC]+1 <= q->nr_requests) {
> 		blk_clear_queue_full(q, BLK_RW_SYNC);
> 		wake_up(&rl->wait[BLK_RW_SYNC]);
> 	}
> If we don't satify the situation of "if", we can get that
> rl->count[BLK_RW_SYNC} < q->nr_quests. It is the same as
> rl->count[BLK_RW_SYNC]+1 <= q->nr_requests.
> All the "else" should satisfy the "else if" check so it isn't
> needed actually.

Thanks, applied.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/