[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y4e7ibMMu4quJMO5@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2022 10:22:33 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Li Nan <linan122@...wei.com>
Cc: josef@...icpanda.com, axboe@...nel.dk, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
yukuai3@...wei.com, yi.zhang@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v2 6/9] blk-iocost: change div64_u64 to
DIV64_U64_ROUND_UP in ioc_refresh_params()
On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 09:21:53PM +0800, Li Nan wrote:
> vrate_min is calculated by DIV64_U64_ROUND_UP, but vrate_max is calculated
> by div64_u64. Vrate_min may be 1 greater than vrate_max if the input
> values min and max of cost.qos are equal.
>
> Signed-off-by: Li Nan <linan122@...wei.com>
> ---
> block/blk-iocost.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-iocost.c b/block/blk-iocost.c
> index f4a754b9d10f..2316ba93e7d6 100644
> --- a/block/blk-iocost.c
> +++ b/block/blk-iocost.c
> @@ -926,7 +926,7 @@ static bool ioc_refresh_params(struct ioc *ioc, bool force)
>
> ioc->vrate_min = DIV64_U64_ROUND_UP((u64)ioc->params.qos[QOS_MIN] *
> VTIME_PER_USEC, MILLION);
> - ioc->vrate_max = div64_u64((u64)ioc->params.qos[QOS_MAX] *
> + ioc->vrate_max = DIV64_U64_ROUND_UP((u64)ioc->params.qos[QOS_MAX] *
> VTIME_PER_USEC, MILLION);
Can you please align the parameters line? Other than that
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists