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;
Date:   Mon, 30 Sep 2019 01:33:24 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To:     "Pavel Begunkov (Silence)" <asml.silence@gmail.com>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] blk-mq: reuse code in blk_mq_check_inflight*()
Message-ID: <20190930083324.GA24152@infradead.org>
References: <11ebb046bf422facf6e438672799306b80038173.1569830385.git.asml.silence@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <11ebb046bf422facf6e438672799306b80038173.1569830385.git.asml.silence@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 11:27:32AM +0300, Pavel Begunkov (Silence) wrote:
> From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
> 
> 1. Reuse the same walker callback for both blk_mq_in_flight() and
> blk_mq_in_flight_rw().
> 
> 2. Store inflight counters immediately in struct mq_inflight.
> It's type-safer and removes extra indirection.

You really want to split this into two patches.  Part 2 looks very
sensible to me, but I don't really see how 1 is qn equivalent
transformation right now.  Splitting it out and writing a non-trivial
changelog might help understanding it if you think it really is
equivalent as-is.