From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 724AFC4321E for ; Thu, 1 Dec 2022 02:21:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229847AbiLACVZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Nov 2022 21:21:25 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53936 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229977AbiLACVC (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Nov 2022 21:21:02 -0500 Received: from dggsgout12.his.huawei.com (unknown [45.249.212.56]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC9BDA057D; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 18:20:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail02.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.67.153]) by dggsgout12.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4NN0Cx51fWz4f3s9r; Thu, 1 Dec 2022 10:20:29 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.178.129] (unknown [10.174.178.129]) by APP4 (Coremail) with SMTP id gCh0CgAnS9huD4hjToLJBQ--.36736S2; Thu, 01 Dec 2022 10:20:32 +0800 (CST) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] A few cleanup and bugfix patches for blk-iocost To: Jens Axboe , tj@kernel.org, josef@toxicpanda.com Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20221018121932.10792-1-shikemeng@huawei.com> <93f9093b-abec-db7e-a945-263cd9355c08@huaweicloud.com> From: Kemeng Shi Message-ID: <8d9c98e5-0433-e025-ccec-4144102e91c5@huaweicloud.com> Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2022 10:20:30 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CM-TRANSID: gCh0CgAnS9huD4hjToLJBQ--.36736S2 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvJXoW7WF1Dtr13XF1xKw4xuw48WFg_yoW8Wr4xpF Z5u3WSvFyDJw4Skr1xKw42qr4Fyay8Wry8X3ZFq345Zwn8t34Sg3s2qF18ur1DXrsxA3ya vFW2qa45C34DAaDanT9S1TB71UUUUUUqnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDU0xBIdaVrnRJUUUk0b4IE77IF4wAFF20E14v26r1j6r4UM7CY07I20VC2zVCF04k2 6cxKx2IYs7xG6r1S6rWUM7CIcVAFz4kK6r1j6r18M28lY4IEw2IIxxk0rwA2F7IY1VAKz4 vEj48ve4kI8wA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_tr0E3s1l84ACjcxK6xIIjxv20xvEc7Cj xVAFwI0_Gr1j6F4UJwA2z4x0Y4vEx4A2jsIE14v26rxl6s0DM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVCY1x 0267AKxVW0oVCq3wAS0I0E0xvYzxvE52x082IY62kv0487Mc02F40EFcxC0VAKzVAqx4xG 6I80ewAv7VC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUJVWUGwAv7VC2z280aVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lOx8S6xCaFV Cjc4AY6r1j6r4UM4x0Y48IcVAKI48JMxk0xIA0c2IEe2xFo4CEbIxvr21l42xK82IYc2Ij 64vIr41l4I8I3I0E4IkC6x0Yz7v_Jr0_Gr1lx2IqxVAqx4xG67AKxVWUJVWUGwC20s026x 8GjcxK67AKxVWUGVWUWwC2zVAF1VAY17CE14v26r126r1DMIIYrxkI7VAKI48JMIIF0xvE 2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Jr0_JF4lIxAIcVC0I7IYx2IY6xkF7I0E14v26r1j6r4UMIIF0xvE42 xK8VAvwI8IcIk0rVWrJr0_WFyUJwCI42IY6I8E87Iv67AKxVWUJVW8JwCI42IY6I8E87Iv 6xkF7I0E14v26r4j6r4UJbIYCTnIWIevJa73UjIFyTuYvjxUzsqWUUUUU X-CM-SenderInfo: 5vklyvpphqwq5kxd4v5lfo033gof0z/ X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org on 12/1/2022 9:46 AM, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 11/30/22 6:45?PM, Kemeng Shi wrote: >> >> Hi jens, >> on 10/18/2022 8:19 PM, Kemeng Shi wrote: >>> This series contain a few patch to correct comment, correct trace of >>> vtime_rate and so on. More detail can be found in the respective >>> changelogs. >>> >>> --- >>> v2: >>> Thanks Tejun for review and comment! >>> Add Acked-by tag from Tejun. >>> Correct description in patch 3/5 and 4/5. >>> Drop "blk-iocost: Avoid to call current_hweight_max if iocg->inuse >>> == iocg->active" >>> Drop "blk-iocost: Remove redundant initialization of struct ioc_gq" >>> Drop "blk-iocost: Get ioc_now inside weight_updated" >>> --- >>> >>> Kemeng Shi (5): >>> blk-iocost: Fix typo in comment >>> blk-iocost: Reset vtime_base_rate in ioc_refresh_params >>> blk-iocost: Trace vtime_base_rate instead of vtime_rate >>> blk-iocost: Remove vrate member in struct ioc_now >>> blk-iocost: Correct comment in blk_iocost_init >>> >>> block/blk-iocost.c | 16 +++++++++------- >>> include/trace/events/iocost.h | 4 ++-- >>> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >> Could you apply this patchset? >> By the way, my apply for an cloud variant of email was just passed >> a few days ago. Is this mail still in spam? > > This one wasn't, but I've seen the huaweicloud.com emails fail > the same origination checks in the past. I'm not sure if was there any fix to huaweicloud.com email. I will use this huaweicloud emails to minimize the trouble before any better solution is found. Sorry for the inconvenience. -- Best wishes Kemeng Shi