linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block, bfq: fix occurrences of request finish method's old name

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: <DB5PR09MB0263734788385F2E4C8163E5EA110@DB5PR09MB0263.eurprd09.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:24:18 +0000
From:   Chiara Bruschi <bruschi.chiara@...look.it>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
CC:     "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "paolo.valente@...aro.org" <paolo.valente@...aro.org>,
        "federico@...ler.it" <federico@...ler.it>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block, bfq: fix occurrences of request finish method's
 old name

Hi Jens,
have you had time to look into this?

Thank you,
Chiara Bruschi


On 12/18/17 5:21 PM, Chiara Bruschi wrote:

Commit '7b9e93616399' ("blk-mq-sched: unify request finished methods")
changed the old name of current bfq_finish_request method, but left it
unchanged elsewhere in the code (related comments, part of function
name bfq_put_rq_priv_body).

This commit fixes all occurrences of the old name of this method by
changing them into the current name.

Fixes: 7b9e93616399 ("blk-mq-sched: unify request finished methods")
Reviewed-by: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
Signed-off-by: Federico Motta <federico@...ler.it>
Signed-off-by: Chiara Bruschi <bruschi.chiara@...look.it>
---
 block/bfq-iosched.c | 26 +++++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
index bcb6d21..6da7f71 100644
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
@@ -3630,8 +3630,8 @@ static struct request *__bfq_dispatch_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
                 }
 
                 /*
-                * We exploit the put_rq_private hook to decrement
-                * rq_in_driver, but put_rq_private will not be
+                * We exploit the bfq_finish_request hook to decrement
+                * rq_in_driver, but bfq_finish_request will not be
                  * invoked on this request. So, to avoid unbalance,
                  * just start this request, without incrementing
                  * rq_in_driver. As a negative consequence,
@@ -3640,14 +3640,14 @@ static struct request *__bfq_dispatch_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
                  * bfq_schedule_dispatch to be invoked uselessly.
                  *
                  * As for implementing an exact solution, the
-                * put_request hook, if defined, is probably invoked
-                * also on this request. So, by exploiting this hook,
-                * we could 1) increment rq_in_driver here, and 2)
-                * decrement it in put_request. Such a solution would
-                * let the value of the counter be always accurate,
-                * but it would entail using an extra interface
-                * function. This cost seems higher than the benefit,
-                * being the frequency of non-elevator-private
+                * bfq_finish_request hook, if defined, is probably
+                * invoked also on this request. So, by exploiting
+                * this hook, we could 1) increment rq_in_driver here,
+                * and 2) decrement it in bfq_finish_request. Such a
+                * solution would let the value of the counter be
+                * always accurate, but it would entail using an extra
+                * interface function. This cost seems higher than the
+                * benefit, being the frequency of non-elevator-private
                  * requests very low.
                  */
                 goto start_rq;
@@ -4482,7 +4482,7 @@ static void bfq_completed_request(struct bfq_queue *bfqq, struct bfq_data *bfqd)
                 bfq_schedule_dispatch(bfqd);
 }
 
-static void bfq_put_rq_priv_body(struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
+static void bfq_finish_request_body(struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
 {
         bfqq->allocated--;
 
@@ -4512,7 +4512,7 @@ static void bfq_finish_request(struct request *rq)
                 spin_lock_irqsave(&bfqd->lock, flags);
 
                 bfq_completed_request(bfqq, bfqd);
-               bfq_put_rq_priv_body(bfqq);
+               bfq_finish_request_body(bfqq);
 
                 spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bfqd->lock, flags);
         } else {
@@ -4533,7 +4533,7 @@ static void bfq_finish_request(struct request *rq)
                         bfqg_stats_update_io_remove(bfqq_group(bfqq),
                                                     rq->cmd_flags);
                 }
-               bfq_put_rq_priv_body(bfqq);
+               bfq_finish_request_body(bfqq);
         }
 
         rq->elv.priv[0] = NULL;
-- 
2.1.4