Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
Date:   Wed, 27 Apr 2022 14:52:51 +0200
From:   Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To:     Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Cc:     jack@suse.cz, tj@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk,
        paolo.valente@linaro.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        yi.zhang@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v3 1/3] block, bfq: record how many queues are busy
 in bfq_group
Message-ID: <20220427125251.yl7ff4ti33w6ktrf@quack3.lan>
References: <20220427124722.48465-1-yukuai3@huawei.com>
 <20220427124722.48465-2-yukuai3@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220427124722.48465-2-yukuai3@huawei.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed 27-04-22 20:47:20, Yu Kuai wrote:
> Prepare to refactor the counting of 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs'.
> 
> Add a counter 'busy_queues' in bfq_group, and update it in
> bfq_add/del_bfqq_busy().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>

...

> diff --git a/block/bfq-wf2q.c b/block/bfq-wf2q.c
> index f8eb340381cf..53826797430f 100644
> --- a/block/bfq-wf2q.c
> +++ b/block/bfq-wf2q.c
> @@ -218,6 +218,14 @@ static bool bfq_no_longer_next_in_service(struct bfq_entity *entity)
>  	return false;
>  }
>  
> +static void bfq_update_busy_queues(struct bfq_queue *bfqq, bool is_add)
> +{
> +	if (is_add)
> +		bfqq_group(bfqq)->busy_queues++;
> +	else
> +		bfqq_group(bfqq)->busy_queues--;
> +}
> +
>  #else /* CONFIG_BFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED */

I think the bool argument here unnecessarily hurts readability (it's
difficult to see what the argument means without looking into the
implementation). I'd rather create two functions bfq_{inc,dec}_busy_queues()
or if you really insist on a single function, we can have
bfq_add_busy_queues() and have 'int' argument that will be +1 or -1.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR