Commit ca11f209 authored by Jens Axboe's avatar Jens Axboe

mq-deadline: make it clear that __dd_dispatch_request() works on all hw queues

Don't pass in the hardware queue to __dd_dispatch_request(), since it
leads the reader to believe that we are returning a request for that
specific hardware queue. That's not how mq-deadline works, the state
for determining which request to serve next is shared across all
hardware queues for a device.
Reviewed-by: default avatarOmar Sandoval <osandov@fb.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarMing Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarJens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
parent 14db4917
......@@ -267,9 +267,8 @@ deadline_next_request(struct deadline_data *dd, int data_dir)
* deadline_dispatch_requests selects the best request according to
* read/write expire, fifo_batch, etc
*/
static struct request *__dd_dispatch_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
static struct request *__dd_dispatch_request(struct deadline_data *dd)
{
struct deadline_data *dd = hctx->queue->elevator->elevator_data;
struct request *rq, *next_rq;
bool reads, writes;
int data_dir;
......@@ -372,13 +371,19 @@ static struct request *__dd_dispatch_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
return rq;
}
/*
* One confusing aspect here is that we get called for a specific
* hardware queue, but we return a request that may not be for a
* different hardware queue. This is because mq-deadline has shared
* state for all hardware queues, in terms of sorting, FIFOs, etc.
*/
static struct request *dd_dispatch_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
{
struct deadline_data *dd = hctx->queue->elevator->elevator_data;
struct request *rq;
spin_lock(&dd->lock);
rq = __dd_dispatch_request(hctx);
rq = __dd_dispatch_request(dd);
spin_unlock(&dd->lock);
return rq;
......
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment