Received: by 2002:a25:ad19:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id y25csp8076580ybi; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 02:26:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzVuUBXl0UOD5gdoJ1dkTv45YhGSGIbgbvf4aMSNltq6jw5uusNcloJ50LM/wB6bBkxS3iN X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:77c5:: with SMTP id e5mr77987566pjs.109.1563874007000; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 02:26:47 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1563874006; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=MyXa4CokcCFCTX57JBglqPD4AlzcsrbZqOuo4zz02cNUgJybDamHW5QJv4SQmKiZ3h LaTp//TyUKfJOGnwyB517jveuF3o4zFBcot1ZQ2/u1Wlyk1pQ3y/rZ3C3gDi3v5i4WyS u6NCUso2aBwYbRKXqbs19eBxDHgSq4YdnAaLDqKK9BAAO4kqEFH9ruQLON+RHaLB63DU sAczXAMT9km7Fwyc659pg7+0hJPSrTqtlCTf8niQBZaawwMjbUzXHrvIdTXzZPWrwFtv SEWoWLOojCtMLHpfDROLSR71AdtnuAoOvkOjD6hq0vVKBd/KHWVFzlsCMdq9aVESBEYh YA4g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=qRk0XCUOOeLhkURXIsrcmBZYRHclzXxoMPAdT26EhIw=; b=YjlXCrWSS5qj+Yvc4r7I+MugnQ0hRDjO3eD2mQYJb3MyVNtI7VyA2zwJErvNTh1n4Z 7y3biahoSZx/jjU131dOMmB2eJ0wEER1y9JQgTRau7kva99HhBE5b6U/o1g2xu/I6pOU 91pKQMIb7ytOx0ds3IsmZQvw0dsT5bT2OQ4iT+zj7luFsYf99GMZVS7zaHvD6fBwOL/k KHLoV2oBGmhh8oZBTRiGLnGCEcubwbS7PYOoJmtfMHPXc4ODDH1iAGDBdZEojtOIZNH1 sCV/b5mhG2Hdy1VvXmuRqCUu8dudjvedpdmxppOk/r2aKfeKYxYCsnLza3C3FRvdiMIN +67w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@linaro.org header.s=google header.b=x4Y4Khhm; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=linaro.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 201si11138749pfc.173.2019.07.23.02.26.31; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 02:26:46 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@linaro.org header.s=google header.b=x4Y4Khhm; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=linaro.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728426AbfGWDNK (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 22 Jul 2019 23:13:10 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-f68.google.com ([209.85.210.68]:41797 "EHLO mail-ot1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726661AbfGWDNK (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jul 2019 23:13:10 -0400 Received: by mail-ot1-f68.google.com with SMTP id o101so42539721ota.8 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 20:13:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qRk0XCUOOeLhkURXIsrcmBZYRHclzXxoMPAdT26EhIw=; b=x4Y4KhhmBcGhMNRZHlH8uiKQqB7vPuwd9a3vzI/zUfipkeumIIxotuiLo/omBUZo1V I4yEENG2NJUeqgWbP1S7e+ALHfprLJHn0HSpbkd3gTfSAJAhc7mDQvXrKA9zm1A2m786 /cvOT/9UgYlY1auQIn+F0rRuWUy1Qdqd5ONcxYNl502flymtImq5ZwDi9EUAlsslM6FR +L5kCSnrHL8qYuXoSb8ERiW3n5QlIqnThtyaAS1MAm7K+zC/omTtboVBCT/izDVm35/7 6cdpMss5uZ4caCUgvGkE+eHNrp1Kki6vY7MNrEXIPrHCfePxLgKg+ccP5BOClq03YZiN odIQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qRk0XCUOOeLhkURXIsrcmBZYRHclzXxoMPAdT26EhIw=; b=C0t1Gll1v5u67v4Z35auFPcU+ie5ObpTVgFm2N2/VoEqqI51G0oXPwea49wqIPQ2MB 4JVCA9mjj1OcG7t8j/bfD2tKJVWtoA8GqYWxmlvm9kidZmC7zXgZKccJOmysUNbd87vX K1U7P37IGHR1agOs0qwiwzE8Zz0XsxPAKtq+eccbWZcKmTjqrXjMSgKQkBctwtw9Fx4/ ZJRq7syVbCZA6sgQby1NGSYomnxX+mc90MiBgbriv1i0UFi6QuMnY7ObPaSr5dxAMyWJ IpuSY5BiPugyWxG1/bhIG/AhKEqMpcoEwjuQt2xpAxhwHlrZ1P+iMIrjFraWhcj6HBZH UHjA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU+TAzCeFbpKRkoEao+jzKBbXTV+sXGJogY1A1kJIpsvrVjfOXi IbGM3TpY6Te8FKQA+cRaSSYXuxo+8/efL4VO+oSALQ== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:590d:: with SMTP id t13mr38048922oth.281.1563851589136; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 20:13:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <94a0d20e6304b909391abd9a425c71c376cad964.1563782844.git.baolin.wang@linaro.org> <20190722141940.GA26528@ming.t460p> In-Reply-To: <20190722141940.GA26528@ming.t460p> From: Baolin Wang Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 11:12:57 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] blk-mq: Export blk_mq_hctx_has_pending() function To: Ming Lei Cc: Jens Axboe , Adrian Hunter , Ulf Hansson , Chunyan Zhang , Orson Zhai , Arnd Bergmann , Linus Walleij , Vincent Guittot , linux-mmc , LKML , linux-block@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Ming, On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 at 22:19, Ming Lei wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 09:09:36PM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote: > > Some SD/MMC host controllers can support packed command or packed request, > > that means we can package several requests to host controller at one time > > to improve performence. And this patch set will introduce MMC packed function > > to support this feature by following patches. > > > > To support MMC packed function, the MMC layer need to know if there are > > requests are pending now in hardware queue to help to combine requests > > as much as possible. If we know there are requests pending in hardware > > queue, then we should not package requests to host controller immediately, > > instead we should collect more requests into MMC packed queue to be packed > > to host controller with packed condition. > > > > Thus export this function for MMC packed function. > > > > Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang > > --- > > block/blk-mq.c | 3 ++- > > include/linux/blk-mq.h | 1 + > > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c > > index b038ec6..5bd4ef9 100644 > > --- a/block/blk-mq.c > > +++ b/block/blk-mq.c > > @@ -63,12 +63,13 @@ static int blk_mq_poll_stats_bkt(const struct request *rq) > > * Check if any of the ctx, dispatch list or elevator > > * have pending work in this hardware queue. > > */ > > -static bool blk_mq_hctx_has_pending(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx) > > +bool blk_mq_hctx_has_pending(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx) > > { > > return !list_empty_careful(&hctx->dispatch) || > > sbitmap_any_bit_set(&hctx->ctx_map) || > > blk_mq_sched_has_work(hctx); > > } > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(blk_mq_hctx_has_pending); > > Just wondering why you don't use the 'last' field of 'struct blk_mq_queue_data', > which is passed to .queue_rq(), and supposed for implementing batch submission. The 'last' field of 'struct blk_mq_queue_data' does not indicate the last request in the hardware queue, since we want to collect more requests from block layer as much as possible to be packed later. And from blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched()--->blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list()---> queue_rq(), I always get 'bd.last = true', which is not useful to combine requests for MMC packed queue. Maybe I missed anything? Thanks for your comments. -- Baolin Wang Best Regards