linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] blk-mq: Inline request status checkers

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: <20190930201324.GA19526@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Sep 2019 16:13:24 -0400
From:   Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
To:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
Cc:     "Pavel Begunkov (Silence)" <asml.silence@...il.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>,
        Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, nbd@...er.debian.org,
        linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] blk-mq: Inline request status checkers

On Mon, Sep 30 2019 at  3:53pm -0400,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org> wrote:

> On 9/30/19 12:43 PM, Pavel Begunkov (Silence) wrote:
> > @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ static bool bt_tags_iter(struct sbitmap *bitmap, unsigned int bitnr, void *data)
> >  	 * test and set the bit before assining ->rqs[].
> >  	 */
> >  	rq = tags->rqs[bitnr];
> > -	if (rq && blk_mq_request_started(rq))
> > +	if (rq && blk_mq_rq_state(rq) != MQ_RQ_IDLE)
> >  		return iter_data->fn(rq, iter_data->data, reserved);
> >  
> >  	return true>
> > @@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ static bool blk_mq_tagset_count_completed_rqs(struct request *rq,
> >  {
> >  	unsigned *count = data;
> >  
> > -	if (blk_mq_request_completed(rq))
> > +	if (blk_mq_rq_state(rq) == MQ_RQ_COMPLETE)
> >  		(*count)++;
> >  	return true;
> >  }
> 
> Changes like the above significantly reduce readability of the code in
> the block layer core. I don't like this. I think this patch is a step
> backwards instead of a step forwards.

I agree, not helpful.