This patch kills the following request flag testing macros.
blk_noretry_request()
blk_rq_started()
blk_pm_suspend_request()
blk_pm_resume_request()
blk_sorted_rq()
blk_barrier_rq()
blk_fua_rq()
All above macros test for single request flag and not used widely and
seem to contribute more to obscurity than readability.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
---
Jens, patch is against ac171c46667c1cb2ee9e22312291df6ed78e1b6e (the
current -linus) but it also applies with offsets to -linus +
elv_insert patch.
block/elevator.c | 8 ++++----
block/ll_rw_blk.c | 2 +-
drivers/ide/ide-cd.c | 2 +-
drivers/ide/ide-io.c | 12 ++++++------
drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c | 4 ++--
drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c | 2 +-
drivers/scsi/sd.c | 6 +++---
include/linux/blkdev.h | 11 ++---------
8 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/elevator.c b/block/elevator.c
index 2fc269f..371d2db 100644
--- a/block/elevator.c
+++ b/block/elevator.c
@@ -287,7 +287,7 @@ void elv_requeue_request(request_queue_t
*/
if (blk_account_rq(rq)) {
q->in_flight--;
- if (blk_sorted_rq(rq) && e->ops->elevator_deactivate_req_fn)
+ if (rq->flags & REQ_SORTED && e->ops->elevator_deactivate_req_fn)
e->ops->elevator_deactivate_req_fn(q, rq);
}
@@ -323,7 +323,7 @@ void __elv_add_request(request_queue_t *
/*
* toggle ordered color
*/
- if (blk_barrier_rq(rq))
+ if (rq->flags & REQ_HARDBARRIER)
q->ordcolor ^= 1;
/*
@@ -465,7 +465,7 @@ struct request *elv_next_request(request
* sees this request (possibly after
* requeueing). Notify IO scheduler.
*/
- if (blk_sorted_rq(rq) &&
+ if (rq->flags & REQ_SORTED &&
e->ops->elevator_activate_req_fn)
e->ops->elevator_activate_req_fn(q, rq);
@@ -602,7 +602,7 @@ void elv_completed_request(request_queue
*/
if (blk_account_rq(rq)) {
q->in_flight--;
- if (blk_sorted_rq(rq) && e->ops->elevator_completed_req_fn)
+ if (rq->flags & REQ_SORTED && e->ops->elevator_completed_req_fn)
e->ops->elevator_completed_req_fn(q, rq);
}
diff --git a/block/ll_rw_blk.c b/block/ll_rw_blk.c
index ee5ed98..91da489 100644
--- a/block/ll_rw_blk.c
+++ b/block/ll_rw_blk.c
@@ -509,7 +509,7 @@ static inline struct request *start_orde
int blk_do_ordered(request_queue_t *q, struct request **rqp)
{
struct request *rq = *rqp;
- int is_barrier = blk_fs_request(rq) && blk_barrier_rq(rq);
+ int is_barrier = blk_fs_request(rq) && rq->flags & REQ_HARDBARRIER;
if (!q->ordseq) {
if (!is_barrier)
diff --git a/drivers/block/viodasd.c b/drivers/block/viodasd.c
diff --git a/drivers/cdrom/sonycd535.c b/drivers/cdrom/sonycd535.c
diff --git a/drivers/cdrom/viocd.c b/drivers/cdrom/viocd.c
diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-cd.c b/drivers/ide/ide-cd.c
index 3325660..0e6a70b 100644
--- a/drivers/ide/ide-cd.c
+++ b/drivers/ide/ide-cd.c
@@ -712,7 +712,7 @@ static int cdrom_decode_status(ide_drive
/* Handle errors from READ and WRITE requests. */
- if (blk_noretry_request(rq))
+ if (rq->flags & REQ_FAILFAST)
do_end_request = 1;
if (sense_key == NOT_READY) {
diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c b/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c
diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-io.c b/drivers/ide/ide-io.c
index c01615d..859ecde 100644
--- a/drivers/ide/ide-io.c
+++ b/drivers/ide/ide-io.c
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ static int __ide_end_request(ide_drive_t
* if failfast is set on a request, override number of sectors and
* complete the whole request right now
*/
- if (blk_noretry_request(rq) && end_io_error(uptodate))
+ if (rq->flags & REQ_FAILFAST && end_io_error(uptodate))
nr_sectors = rq->hard_nr_sectors;
if (!blk_fs_request(rq) && end_io_error(uptodate) && !rq->errors)
@@ -233,10 +233,10 @@ static void ide_complete_pm_request (ide
#ifdef DEBUG_PM
printk("%s: completing PM request, %s\n", drive->name,
- blk_pm_suspend_request(rq) ? "suspend" : "resume");
+ rq->flags & REQ_PM_SUSPEND ? "suspend" : "resume");
#endif
spin_lock_irqsave(&ide_lock, flags);
- if (blk_pm_suspend_request(rq)) {
+ if (rq->flags & REQ_PM_SUSPEND) {
blk_stop_queue(drive->queue);
} else {
drive->blocked = 0;
@@ -451,7 +451,7 @@ static ide_startstop_t ide_ata_error(ide
/* force an abort */
hwif->OUTB(WIN_IDLEIMMEDIATE, IDE_COMMAND_REG);
- if (rq->errors >= ERROR_MAX || blk_noretry_request(rq))
+ if (rq->errors >= ERROR_MAX || rq->flags & REQ_FAILFAST)
ide_kill_rq(drive, rq);
else {
if ((rq->errors & ERROR_RESET) == ERROR_RESET) {
@@ -909,11 +909,11 @@ static ide_startstop_t start_request (id
if (block == 0 && drive->remap_0_to_1 == 1)
block = 1; /* redirect MBR access to EZ-Drive partn table */
- if (blk_pm_suspend_request(rq) &&
+ if (rq->flags & REQ_PM_SUSPEND &&
rq->pm->pm_step == ide_pm_state_start_suspend)
/* Mark drive blocked when starting the suspend sequence. */
drive->blocked = 1;
- else if (blk_pm_resume_request(rq) &&
+ else if (rq->flags & REQ_PM_RESUME &&
rq->pm->pm_step == ide_pm_state_start_resume) {
/*
* The first thing we do on wakeup is to wait for BSY bit to
diff --git a/drivers/message/i2o/i2o_block.c b/drivers/message/i2o/i2o_block.c
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
index 5cc97b7..965ba28 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
@@ -1309,7 +1309,7 @@ int scsi_decide_disposition(struct scsi_
* even if the request is marked fast fail, we still requeue
* for queue congestion conditions (QUEUE_FULL or BUSY) */
if ((++scmd->retries) < scmd->allowed
- && !blk_noretry_request(scmd->request)) {
+ && !(scmd->request->flags & REQ_FAILFAST)) {
return NEEDS_RETRY;
} else {
/*
@@ -1432,7 +1432,7 @@ static void scsi_eh_flush_done_q(struct
list_for_each_entry_safe(scmd, next, done_q, eh_entry) {
list_del_init(&scmd->eh_entry);
if (scsi_device_online(scmd->device) &&
- !blk_noretry_request(scmd->request) &&
+ !(scmd->request->flags & REQ_FAILFAST) &&
(++scmd->retries < scmd->allowed)) {
SCSI_LOG_ERROR_RECOVERY(3, printk("%s: flush"
" retry cmd: %p\n",
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
index 4a60285..0a9da5c 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
@@ -771,7 +771,7 @@ static struct scsi_cmnd *scsi_end_reques
leftover = req->data_len;
/* kill remainder if no retrys */
- if (!uptodate && blk_noretry_request(req))
+ if (!uptodate && req->flags & REQ_FAILFAST)
end_that_request_chunk(req, 0, leftover);
else {
if (requeue) {
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd.c b/drivers/scsi/sd.c
index 930db39..3bb1d33 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/sd.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/sd.c
@@ -323,7 +323,7 @@ static int sd_init_command(struct scsi_c
if (block > 0xffffffff) {
SCpnt->cmnd[0] += READ_16 - READ_6;
- SCpnt->cmnd[1] |= blk_fua_rq(rq) ? 0x8 : 0;
+ SCpnt->cmnd[1] |= rq->flags & REQ_FUA ? 0x8 : 0;
SCpnt->cmnd[2] = sizeof(block) > 4 ? (unsigned char) (block >> 56) & 0xff : 0;
SCpnt->cmnd[3] = sizeof(block) > 4 ? (unsigned char) (block >> 48) & 0xff : 0;
SCpnt->cmnd[4] = sizeof(block) > 4 ? (unsigned char) (block >> 40) & 0xff : 0;
@@ -343,7 +343,7 @@ static int sd_init_command(struct scsi_c
this_count = 0xffff;
SCpnt->cmnd[0] += READ_10 - READ_6;
- SCpnt->cmnd[1] |= blk_fua_rq(rq) ? 0x8 : 0;
+ SCpnt->cmnd[1] |= rq->flags & REQ_FUA ? 0x8 : 0;
SCpnt->cmnd[2] = (unsigned char) (block >> 24) & 0xff;
SCpnt->cmnd[3] = (unsigned char) (block >> 16) & 0xff;
SCpnt->cmnd[4] = (unsigned char) (block >> 8) & 0xff;
@@ -352,7 +352,7 @@ static int sd_init_command(struct scsi_c
SCpnt->cmnd[7] = (unsigned char) (this_count >> 8) & 0xff;
SCpnt->cmnd[8] = (unsigned char) this_count & 0xff;
} else {
- if (unlikely(blk_fua_rq(rq))) {
+ if (unlikely(rq->flags & REQ_FUA)) {
/*
* This happens only if this drive failed
* 10byte rw command with ILLEGAL_REQUEST
diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
index 860e7a4..06cd868 100644
--- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
+++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
@@ -489,20 +489,13 @@ enum {
#define blk_fs_request(rq) ((rq)->flags & REQ_CMD)
#define blk_pc_request(rq) ((rq)->flags & REQ_BLOCK_PC)
-#define blk_noretry_request(rq) ((rq)->flags & REQ_FAILFAST)
-#define blk_rq_started(rq) ((rq)->flags & REQ_STARTED)
-#define blk_account_rq(rq) (blk_rq_started(rq) && blk_fs_request(rq))
+#define blk_account_rq(rq) \
+ ((rq)->flags & (REQ_CMD | REQ_STARTED) == REQ_CMD | REQ_STARTED)
-#define blk_pm_suspend_request(rq) ((rq)->flags & REQ_PM_SUSPEND)
-#define blk_pm_resume_request(rq) ((rq)->flags & REQ_PM_RESUME)
#define blk_pm_request(rq) \
((rq)->flags & (REQ_PM_SUSPEND | REQ_PM_RESUME))
-#define blk_sorted_rq(rq) ((rq)->flags & REQ_SORTED)
-#define blk_barrier_rq(rq) ((rq)->flags & REQ_HARDBARRIER)
-#define blk_fua_rq(rq) ((rq)->flags & REQ_FUA)
-
#define list_entry_rq(ptr) list_entry((ptr), struct request, queuelist)
#define rq_data_dir(rq) ((rq)->flags & 1)
On Wed, Feb 08 2006, Tejun Heo wrote:
> This patch kills the following request flag testing macros.
>
> blk_noretry_request()
> blk_rq_started()
> blk_pm_suspend_request()
> blk_pm_resume_request()
> blk_sorted_rq()
> blk_barrier_rq()
> blk_fua_rq()
>
> All above macros test for single request flag and not used widely and
> seem to contribute more to obscurity than readability.
Agreed, I've queued it up post-2.6.16
--
Jens Axboe
Tejun Heo wrote:
> This patch kills the following request flag testing macros.
>
> blk_noretry_request()
> blk_rq_started()
> blk_pm_suspend_request()
> blk_pm_resume_request()
> blk_sorted_rq()
> blk_barrier_rq()
> blk_fua_rq()
>
> All above macros test for single request flag and not used widely and
> seem to contribute more to obscurity than readability.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
heh, I guess that's a manner of opinion :)
To me, your patch makes things less readable. Example:
> - int is_barrier = blk_fs_request(rq) && blk_barrier_rq(rq);
> + int is_barrier = blk_fs_request(rq) && rq->flags & REQ_HARDBARRIER;
After your change is applied, the above statement is no longer visually
consistent with itself. The reader must decode two different styles of
test in his brain, as opposed to one.
Jeff
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Tejun Heo wrote:
>
>> This patch kills the following request flag testing macros.
>>
>> blk_noretry_request()
>> blk_rq_started()
>> blk_pm_suspend_request()
>> blk_pm_resume_request()
>> blk_sorted_rq()
>> blk_barrier_rq()
>> blk_fua_rq()
>>
>> All above macros test for single request flag and not used widely and
>> seem to contribute more to obscurity than readability.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
>
>
> heh, I guess that's a manner of opinion :)
>
> To me, your patch makes things less readable. Example:
>
>> - int is_barrier = blk_fs_request(rq) && blk_barrier_rq(rq);
>> + int is_barrier = blk_fs_request(rq) && rq->flags & REQ_HARDBARRIER;
>
>
> After your change is applied, the above statement is no longer visually
> consistent with itself. The reader must decode two different styles of
> test in his brain, as opposed to one.
>
Hello, Jeff.
Yeah, I didn't like that line either, but the thing that triggered this
patch is this message from Linus. This is a reply to Andrew's
dropped-from-rc message so not on lkml.
> I'm applying this under protest.
>
> The code may be right, but it visually makes _zero_ sense.
>
> The fact that "blk_barrier_rq()" only triggers on hard barriers means that
> it does what you describe in the changelog, but read the code and see how
> little sense it makes when you _read_ it. You just checked that the rq has
> a barrier (either a soft or a hard one), and now you check "again" whether
> it has a barrier.
>
> That's what it looks like from reading the code. Confusing. And thus prone
> to bugs.
>
The code he was talking about looks like.
if (rq->flags & (REQ_SOFTBARRIER | REQ_HARDBARRIER) {
....
if (blk_barrier_rq(rq))
q->ordcolor ^= 1;
....
}
We could add blk_barrier_rq() to test for both flags and add
blk_hardbarrier_rq() and blk_softbarrier_rq(), but the flags are not
used that widely and some other flag testing macros are used only few
times in core block layer, so I determined to kill infrequently used macros.
I agree that the change makes code harder to eyes in some places, but it
doesn't obfuscate the code and results in less maintenance overhead in
general. Remember a few testing macros is okay but remembering a dozen
gets a bit annoying, IMHO.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Tejun Heo wrote:
> The code he was talking about looks like.
>
> if (rq->flags & (REQ_SOFTBARRIER | REQ_HARDBARRIER) {
Yes, I certainly agree you don't want to test the same variable multiple
times, if you are just testing bits in the same variable.
Jeff
On Thu, Feb 09 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Tejun Heo wrote:
> >The code he was talking about looks like.
> >
> >if (rq->flags & (REQ_SOFTBARRIER | REQ_HARDBARRIER) {
>
>
> Yes, I certainly agree you don't want to test the same variable multiple
> times, if you are just testing bits in the same variable.
Very few of the flags are usually tested together, so we could just fix
this particular instance. So blk_softbarrier_rq() and
blk_hardbarrier_rq(), combined tested with blk_barrier_rq().
--
Jens Axboe