| Message ID | 20221222191641.1643117-11-shikemeng@huaweicloud.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | A few bugfix and cleancode patch for bfq | expand |
On Fri 23-12-22 03:16:41, Kemeng Shi wrote: > bfqd->bfq_wr_max_softrt_rate is assigned with 7000 in bfq_init_queue and > never changed. So we can remove bfqd->bfq_wr_max_softrt_rate > 0 check > which is always true. > > Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huaweicloud.com> I would just leave these checks for documentation purposes and for possible experiments (e.g. disabling this logic by setting bfq_wr_max_softrt_rate to 0). Alternatively, we could just define a constant for this and then we can remove all the checks, that would be a clean solution as well. Honza > --- > block/bfq-iosched.c | 6 ++---- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c > index 91bc68fba72d..00cdd42ac02a 100644 > --- a/block/bfq-iosched.c > +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c > @@ -1788,8 +1788,7 @@ static void bfq_bfqq_handle_idle_busy_switch(struct bfq_data *bfqd, > * to control its weight explicitly) > */ > in_burst = bfq_bfqq_in_large_burst(bfqq); > - soft_rt = bfqd->bfq_wr_max_softrt_rate > 0 && > - !BFQQ_TOTALLY_SEEKY(bfqq) && > + soft_rt = !BFQQ_TOTALLY_SEEKY(bfqq) && > !in_burst && > time_is_before_jiffies(bfqq->soft_rt_next_start) && > bfqq->dispatched == 0 && > @@ -4284,8 +4283,7 @@ void bfq_bfqq_expire(struct bfq_data *bfqd, > if (bfqd->low_latency && bfqq->wr_coeff == 1) > bfqq->last_wr_start_finish = jiffies; > > - if (bfqd->low_latency && bfqd->bfq_wr_max_softrt_rate > 0 && > - RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&bfqq->sort_list)) { > + if (bfqd->low_latency && RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&bfqq->sort_list)) { > /* > * If we get here, and there are no outstanding > * requests, then the request pattern is isochronous > -- > 2.30.0 >
diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c index 91bc68fba72d..00cdd42ac02a 100644 --- a/block/bfq-iosched.c +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c @@ -1788,8 +1788,7 @@ static void bfq_bfqq_handle_idle_busy_switch(struct bfq_data *bfqd, * to control its weight explicitly) */ in_burst = bfq_bfqq_in_large_burst(bfqq); - soft_rt = bfqd->bfq_wr_max_softrt_rate > 0 && - !BFQQ_TOTALLY_SEEKY(bfqq) && + soft_rt = !BFQQ_TOTALLY_SEEKY(bfqq) && !in_burst && time_is_before_jiffies(bfqq->soft_rt_next_start) && bfqq->dispatched == 0 && @@ -4284,8 +4283,7 @@ void bfq_bfqq_expire(struct bfq_data *bfqd, if (bfqd->low_latency && bfqq->wr_coeff == 1) bfqq->last_wr_start_finish = jiffies; - if (bfqd->low_latency && bfqd->bfq_wr_max_softrt_rate > 0 && - RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&bfqq->sort_list)) { + if (bfqd->low_latency && RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&bfqq->sort_list)) { /* * If we get here, and there are no outstanding * requests, then the request pattern is isochronous
bfqd->bfq_wr_max_softrt_rate is assigned with 7000 in bfq_init_queue and never changed. So we can remove bfqd->bfq_wr_max_softrt_rate > 0 check which is always true. Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huaweicloud.com> --- block/bfq-iosched.c | 6 ++---- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)