From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65B88246764; Fri, 25 Jul 2025 18:13:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1753467225; cv=none; b=oNNQt6cKp0+1a+8VWIVNpKo0GlRBHaYssMxd+qA94yYrnDweaok8O/HIccF5jNLzwKYrQ70/nlVAK4ms5T9ZjE0hL804ieUm01sc/RT4tp5Nqx3oCTfrxP9NjHeB1AXVRr33GAm79K7EWu1wgd0yvUsOvVU7hzNxOeQ19LRmi+Q= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1753467225; c=relaxed/simple; bh=gvP4RTQh1qAjrE4HkuGUslv22dn+rJLnxSCcEZsHzCQ=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=BSQXsHCZm7uoDy4MrWp/B+DIVB/qJc1U+nGyHdLJ8mlAKxdmYAJf3M5sZVcAVEeHv0f+hFhhQzdAsGDdCjRMyIrY5MBipwQnGO0FFL2xiL3NWB9zrRGnXHcq2Ina8jzY+NuR9rXOeAdpdarTWM9YyIhY1MTbrG8kQMU2yBzWzKA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=n4w/DRDB; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="n4w/DRDB" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2B581C4CEE7; Fri, 25 Jul 2025 18:13:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1753467224; bh=gvP4RTQh1qAjrE4HkuGUslv22dn+rJLnxSCcEZsHzCQ=; h=Date:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=n4w/DRDB4GkzLul076g0RAfzMkTOUSjznvuOzHeHYdnS13sHW529xD8vaSl+PIt// VM4TOX3lrRQPo2YzoGLMFyYGzAxy3aTy4MXbDg5ozjTXfFHSggkUkgayMvyEnLl+nX hb8RmyM8++MmN0f7AH1hM+2WQzVidQN0hIW3li3zu6WaxA/Jwm73oJhWCysrJK9yXT 3XpCnR3HUe/ArBLlZQA95xgNybjX4+aIe8GIuy2aW18WuWjTP3yroxE0Jj5oLSVY8d lsOdITy/jOokrLPEq4uOkHeXvtK5I2eD/bDUHFvwG6Dca0Jsql8yfvijMeYj2/9UmC jleOrISLPse6g== Message-ID: <9e1bc039-ed01-46d4-8ce3-6ce0f73f2733@kernel.org> Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2025 02:13:39 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Reply-To: yukuai@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] blk-wbt: Eliminate ambiguity in the comments of struct rq_wb To: Tang Yizhou , axboe@kernel.dk, hch@lst.de, jack@suse.cz Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tangyeechou@gmail.com References: <20250724083001.362882-1-yizhou.tang@shopee.com> <20250724083001.362882-3-yizhou.tang@shopee.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Yu Kuai In-Reply-To: <20250724083001.362882-3-yizhou.tang@shopee.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi, 在 2025/7/24 16:30, Tang Yizhou 写道: > From: Tang Yizhou > > In the current implementation, the last_issue and last_comp members of > struct rq_wb are used only by read requests and not by non-throttled write > requests. Therefore, eliminate the ambiguity here. > > Signed-off-by: Tang Yizhou > --- > block/blk-wbt.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/block/blk-wbt.c b/block/blk-wbt.c > index 30886d44f6cd..eb8037bae0bd 100644 > --- a/block/blk-wbt.c > +++ b/block/blk-wbt.c > @@ -85,8 +85,8 @@ struct rq_wb { > u64 sync_issue; > void *sync_cookie; > > - unsigned long last_issue; /* last non-throttled issue */ > - unsigned long last_comp; /* last non-throttled comp */ > + unsigned long last_issue; /* issue time of last read rq */ > + unsigned long last_comp; /* completion time of last read rq */ > unsigned long min_lat_nsec; > struct rq_qos rqos; > struct rq_wait rq_wait[WBT_NUM_RWQ]; Not sure if this is worth it, I'm more concerned about backport trouble. Thanks, Kuai