Re: [PATCH scsi-misc-2.6 03/04] scsi: make scsi_requeue_request() use blk_requeue_request()

2005-04-12 Thread Tejun Heo 
 Hello, Christoph Hellwig.

On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 01:44:19PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > +   cmd->request->flags |= REQ_SOFTBARRIER;
> > +
> > +   spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags);
> > +   blk_requeue_request(q, cmd->request);
> > +   spin_unlock_irqrestore(q->queue_lock, flags);
> >  
> > scsi_run_queue(q);
> 
> This exact code sequence is duplicated in the previous patch, maybe time
> for a
> 
> void scsi_requeue_request(struct request *rq)
> {
>   struct request_queue *q = rq->q;
>   unsigned long flags;
> 
>   rq->flags |= REQ_SOFTBARRIER;
> 
>   spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags);
>   blk_requeue_request(q, rq);
>   spin_unlock_irqrestore(q->queue_lock, flags);
>   
>   scsi_run_queue(q);
> }

 The duplicated code path is in scsi_queue_insert(), and the the
function is removed by later requeue path consolidation patchset.  So,
I don't think separating out scsi_requeue_request() is necessary.
However, I'm thinking about setting REQ_SOFTBARRIER right after
allocating cmd in prep_fn().  So that we don't have to set
REQ_SOFTBARRIER in three different places.  Also, IMHO, it better
represents the purpose of REQ_SOFTBARRIER.

 Thanks a lot for your input.  :-)

-- 
tejun

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH scsi-misc-2.6 03/04] scsi: make scsi_requeue_request() use blk_requeue_request()

2005-04-12 Thread Tejun Heo 
 Hello, Christoph Hellwig.

On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 01:44:19PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
  +   cmd-request-flags |= REQ_SOFTBARRIER;
  +
  +   spin_lock_irqsave(q-queue_lock, flags);
  +   blk_requeue_request(q, cmd-request);
  +   spin_unlock_irqrestore(q-queue_lock, flags);
   
  scsi_run_queue(q);
 
 This exact code sequence is duplicated in the previous patch, maybe time
 for a
 
 void scsi_requeue_request(struct request *rq)
 {
   struct request_queue *q = rq-q;
   unsigned long flags;
 
   rq-flags |= REQ_SOFTBARRIER;
 
   spin_lock_irqsave(q-queue_lock, flags);
   blk_requeue_request(q, rq);
   spin_unlock_irqrestore(q-queue_lock, flags);
   
   scsi_run_queue(q);
 }

 The duplicated code path is in scsi_queue_insert(), and the the
function is removed by later requeue path consolidation patchset.  So,
I don't think separating out scsi_requeue_request() is necessary.
However, I'm thinking about setting REQ_SOFTBARRIER right after
allocating cmd in prep_fn().  So that we don't have to set
REQ_SOFTBARRIER in three different places.  Also, IMHO, it better
represents the purpose of REQ_SOFTBARRIER.

 Thanks a lot for your input.  :-)

-- 
tejun

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH scsi-misc-2.6 03/04] scsi: make scsi_requeue_request() use blk_requeue_request()

2005-04-11 Thread Christoph Hellwig 
> + cmd->request->flags |= REQ_SOFTBARRIER;
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags);
> + blk_requeue_request(q, cmd->request);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(q->queue_lock, flags);
>  
>   scsi_run_queue(q);

This exact code sequence is duplicated in the previous patch, maybe time
for a

void scsi_requeue_request(struct request *rq)
{
struct request_queue *q = rq->q;
unsigned long flags;

rq->flags |= REQ_SOFTBARRIER;

spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags);
blk_requeue_request(q, rq);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(q->queue_lock, flags);
  
scsi_run_queue(q);
}

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH scsi-misc-2.6 03/04] scsi: make scsi_requeue_request() use blk_requeue_request()

2005-04-11 Thread Christoph Hellwig 
 + cmd-request-flags |= REQ_SOFTBARRIER;
 +
 + spin_lock_irqsave(q-queue_lock, flags);
 + blk_requeue_request(q, cmd-request);
 + spin_unlock_irqrestore(q-queue_lock, flags);
  
   scsi_run_queue(q);

This exact code sequence is duplicated in the previous patch, maybe time
for a

void scsi_requeue_request(struct request *rq)
{
struct request_queue *q = rq-q;
unsigned long flags;

rq-flags |= REQ_SOFTBARRIER;

spin_lock_irqsave(q-queue_lock, flags);
blk_requeue_request(q, rq);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(q-queue_lock, flags);
  
scsi_run_queue(q);
}

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH scsi-misc-2.6 03/04] scsi: make scsi_requeue_request() use blk_requeue_request()

2005-04-10 Thread Tejun Heo 
03_scsi_REQ_SPECIAL_semantic_scsi_requeue_command.patch

scsi_requeue_request() used to use blk_insert_request() for
requeueing requests.  This behavior depends on the unobvious
behavior of blk_insert_request() setting REQ_SPECIAL and
REQ_SOFTBARRIER when requeueing.  This patch makes
scsi_requeue_request() use blk_requeue_request() and
explicitly set REQ_SOFTBARRIER.  As REQ_SPECIAL now means
special requests, the flag is not set on requeue.

Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

 scsi_lib.c |8 +++-
 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Index: scsi-reqfn-export/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
===
--- scsi-reqfn-export.orig/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c  2005-04-11 
12:27:07.0 +0900
+++ scsi-reqfn-export/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c   2005-04-11 12:27:08.0 
+0900
@@ -483,8 +483,14 @@ static void scsi_run_queue(struct reques
  */
 static void scsi_requeue_command(struct request_queue *q, struct scsi_cmnd 
*cmd)
 {
+   unsigned long flags;
+
cmd->request->flags &= ~REQ_DONTPREP;
-   blk_insert_request(q, cmd->request, 1, cmd, 1);
+   cmd->request->flags |= REQ_SOFTBARRIER;
+
+   spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags);
+   blk_requeue_request(q, cmd->request);
+   spin_unlock_irqrestore(q->queue_lock, flags);
 
scsi_run_queue(q);
 }

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH scsi-misc-2.6 03/04] scsi: make scsi_requeue_request() use blk_requeue_request()

2005-04-10 Thread Tejun Heo 
03_scsi_REQ_SPECIAL_semantic_scsi_requeue_command.patch

scsi_requeue_request() used to use blk_insert_request() for
requeueing requests.  This behavior depends on the unobvious
behavior of blk_insert_request() setting REQ_SPECIAL and
REQ_SOFTBARRIER when requeueing.  This patch makes
scsi_requeue_request() use blk_requeue_request() and
explicitly set REQ_SOFTBARRIER.  As REQ_SPECIAL now means
special requests, the flag is not set on requeue.

Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 scsi_lib.c |8 +++-
 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Index: scsi-reqfn-export/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
===
--- scsi-reqfn-export.orig/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c  2005-04-11 
12:27:07.0 +0900
+++ scsi-reqfn-export/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c   2005-04-11 12:27:08.0 
+0900
@@ -483,8 +483,14 @@ static void scsi_run_queue(struct reques
  */
 static void scsi_requeue_command(struct request_queue *q, struct scsi_cmnd 
*cmd)
 {
+   unsigned long flags;
+
cmd-request-flags = ~REQ_DONTPREP;
-   blk_insert_request(q, cmd-request, 1, cmd, 1);
+   cmd-request-flags |= REQ_SOFTBARRIER;
+
+   spin_lock_irqsave(q-queue_lock, flags);
+   blk_requeue_request(q, cmd-request);
+   spin_unlock_irqrestore(q-queue_lock, flags);
 
scsi_run_queue(q);
 }

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/