[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230710064705.1847287-1-chengming.zhou@linux.dev>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2023 14:47:04 +0800
From: chengming.zhou@...ux.dev
To: axboe@...nel.dk, hch@....de, ming.lei@...hat.com
Cc: linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
zhouchengming@...edance.com
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] blk-flush: fix rq->flush.seq for post-flush requests
From: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@...edance.com>
If the policy == (REQ_FSEQ_DATA | REQ_FSEQ_POSTFLUSH), it means that the
data sequence and post-flush sequence need to be done for this request.
The rq->flush.seq should record what sequences have been done (or don't
need to be done). So in this case, pre-flush doesn't need to be done,
we should init rq->flush.seq to REQ_FSEQ_PREFLUSH not REQ_FSEQ_POSTFLUSH.
Of course, this doesn't cause any problem in fact, since pre-flush and
post-flush sequence do the same thing for now.
But we'd better fix this value, and the next patch will depend on this
value to be correct.
Signed-off-by: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@...edance.com>
---
block/blk-flush.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-flush.c b/block/blk-flush.c
index 4826d2d61a23..094a6adb2718 100644
--- a/block/blk-flush.c
+++ b/block/blk-flush.c
@@ -448,7 +448,7 @@ bool blk_insert_flush(struct request *rq)
* the post flush, and then just pass the command on.
*/
blk_rq_init_flush(rq);
- rq->flush.seq |= REQ_FSEQ_POSTFLUSH;
+ rq->flush.seq |= REQ_FSEQ_PREFLUSH;
spin_lock_irq(&fq->mq_flush_lock);
fq->flush_data_in_flight++;
spin_unlock_irq(&fq->mq_flush_lock);
--
2.41.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists