linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/13] block, cfq: misc updates to cfq_io

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

Message-ID: <20111027153901.GG7491@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 27 Oct 2011 11:39:01 -0400
From:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	axboe@...nel.dk, ctalbott@...gle.com, rni@...gle.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/13] block, cfq: misc updates to cfq_io_context

On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 06:48:32PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Make the following changes to prepare for ioc/cic management cleanup.
> 
> * Add cic->q so that ioc can determine the associated queue without
>   querying cfq.  This will eventually replace ->key.

Not sure what's the advantage of storing cic->q instead of cic->cfqd.
In blk-ioc code getting to cic's queue becomes easier but then reaching
to cfqd in cfq code becomes much longer.

static inline struct cfq_data *cic_to_cfqd(struct cfq_io_context *cic)
{
        return cic->q->elevator->elevator_data;
}

May be storing cic->cfqd is not a bad idea.

For blk-ioc.

cic_queue = cic->cfqd->queue;

And for CFQ

cic_cfqd = cic->cfqd;

None of the paths is too long for either code. It is a very minor point
though.

Thanks
Vivek
--
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/