mirror of
https://github.com/AuxXxilium/linux_dsm_epyc7002.git
synced 2024-11-24 04:50:53 +07:00
blk-mq: add timer in blk_mq_start_request
This way will become consistent with non-mq case, also avoid to update rq->deadline twice for mq. The comment said: "We do this early, to ensure we are on the right CPU.", but no percpu stuff is used in blk_add_timer(), so it isn't necessary. Even when inserting from plug list, there is no such guarantee at all. Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
3ee3237239
commit
2b8393b43e
@ -411,16 +411,7 @@ static void blk_mq_start_request(struct request *rq, bool last)
|
||||
if (unlikely(blk_bidi_rq(rq)))
|
||||
rq->next_rq->resid_len = blk_rq_bytes(rq->next_rq);
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Just mark start time and set the started bit. Due to memory
|
||||
* ordering, we know we'll see the correct deadline as long as
|
||||
* REQ_ATOMIC_STARTED is seen. Use the default queue timeout,
|
||||
* unless one has been set in the request.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
if (!rq->timeout)
|
||||
rq->deadline = jiffies + q->rq_timeout;
|
||||
else
|
||||
rq->deadline = jiffies + rq->timeout;
|
||||
blk_add_timer(rq);
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Mark us as started and clear complete. Complete might have been
|
||||
@ -972,11 +963,6 @@ static void __blk_mq_insert_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
|
||||
list_add_tail(&rq->queuelist, &ctx->rq_list);
|
||||
|
||||
blk_mq_hctx_mark_pending(hctx, ctx);
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* We do this early, to ensure we are on the right CPU.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
blk_add_timer(rq);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
void blk_mq_insert_request(struct request *rq, bool at_head, bool run_queue,
|
||||
@ -1219,7 +1205,6 @@ static void blk_mq_make_request(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio)
|
||||
|
||||
blk_mq_bio_to_request(rq, bio);
|
||||
blk_mq_start_request(rq, true);
|
||||
blk_add_timer(rq);
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* For OK queue, we are done. For error, kill it. Any other
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user