* [PATCH 1/8] blk-iocost: Fix typo in comment
2022-10-17 2:00 [PATCH 0/8] A few cleanup and bugfix patches for blk-iocost Kemeng Shi
@ 2022-10-17 2:00 ` Kemeng Shi
2022-10-17 18:52 ` Tejun Heo
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 2/8] blk-iocost: Reset vtime_base_rate in ioc_refresh_params Kemeng Shi
` (6 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Kemeng Shi @ 2022-10-17 2:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tj, axboe, linux-block, linux-kernel; +Cc: shikemeng
soley -> solely
Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huawei.com>
---
block/blk-iocost.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-iocost.c b/block/blk-iocost.c
index 495396425bad..be4bc38821e2 100644
--- a/block/blk-iocost.c
+++ b/block/blk-iocost.c
@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@
* busy signal.
*
* As devices can have deep queues and be unfair in how the queued commands
- * are executed, soley depending on rq wait may not result in satisfactory
+ * are executed, solely depending on rq wait may not result in satisfactory
* control quality. For a better control quality, completion latency QoS
* parameters can be configured so that the device is considered saturated
* if N'th percentile completion latency rises above the set point.
--
2.30.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [PATCH 2/8] blk-iocost: Reset vtime_base_rate in ioc_refresh_params
2022-10-17 2:00 [PATCH 0/8] A few cleanup and bugfix patches for blk-iocost Kemeng Shi
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 1/8] blk-iocost: Fix typo in comment Kemeng Shi
@ 2022-10-17 2:00 ` Kemeng Shi
2022-10-17 18:59 ` Tejun Heo
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 3/8] blk-iocost: Trace vtime_base_rate instead of vtime_rate Kemeng Shi
` (5 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Kemeng Shi @ 2022-10-17 2:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tj, axboe, linux-block, linux-kernel; +Cc: shikemeng
Since commit ac33e91e2daca("blk-iocost: implement vtime loss compensation")
split vtime_rate into vtime_rate and vtime_base_rate, we need reset both
vtime_base_rate and vtime_rate when device parameters are refreshed.
If vtime_base_rate is no reset here, vtime_rate will be overwritten with
old vtime_base_rate soon in ioc_refresh_vrate.
Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huawei.com>
---
block/blk-iocost.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-iocost.c b/block/blk-iocost.c
index be4bc38821e2..9214733bbc14 100644
--- a/block/blk-iocost.c
+++ b/block/blk-iocost.c
@@ -906,8 +906,10 @@ static bool ioc_refresh_params(struct ioc *ioc, bool force)
if (idx == ioc->autop_idx && !force)
return false;
- if (idx != ioc->autop_idx)
+ if (idx != ioc->autop_idx) {
atomic64_set(&ioc->vtime_rate, VTIME_PER_USEC);
+ ioc->vtime_base_rate = VTIME_PER_USEC;
+ }
ioc->autop_idx = idx;
ioc->autop_too_fast_at = 0;
--
2.30.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 2/8] blk-iocost: Reset vtime_base_rate in ioc_refresh_params
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 2/8] blk-iocost: Reset vtime_base_rate in ioc_refresh_params Kemeng Shi
@ 2022-10-17 18:59 ` Tejun Heo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Tejun Heo @ 2022-10-17 18:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kemeng Shi; +Cc: axboe, linux-block, linux-kernel
On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 10:00:05AM +0800, Kemeng Shi wrote:
> Since commit ac33e91e2daca("blk-iocost: implement vtime loss compensation")
> split vtime_rate into vtime_rate and vtime_base_rate, we need reset both
> vtime_base_rate and vtime_rate when device parameters are refreshed.
> If vtime_base_rate is no reset here, vtime_rate will be overwritten with
> old vtime_base_rate soon in ioc_refresh_vrate.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huawei.com>
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Thanks.
--
tejun
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 3/8] blk-iocost: Trace vtime_base_rate instead of vtime_rate
2022-10-17 2:00 [PATCH 0/8] A few cleanup and bugfix patches for blk-iocost Kemeng Shi
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 1/8] blk-iocost: Fix typo in comment Kemeng Shi
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 2/8] blk-iocost: Reset vtime_base_rate in ioc_refresh_params Kemeng Shi
@ 2022-10-17 2:00 ` Kemeng Shi
2022-10-17 19:03 ` Tejun Heo
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 4/8] blk-iocost: Remove vrate member in struct ioc_now Kemeng Shi
` (4 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Kemeng Shi @ 2022-10-17 2:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tj, axboe, linux-block, linux-kernel; +Cc: shikemeng
Since commit ac33e91e2daca ("blk-iocost: implement vtime loss
compensation") rename original vtime_base to vtime_base_rate
and current vtime_base is original vtime_base with compensation.
The current rate showed in tracepoint is mixed with vtime_base
and vtime_base_rate:
1) In function ioc_adjust_base_vrate, the first trace_iocost_ioc_vrate_adj
shows vtime_base, the second trace_iocost_ioc_vrate_adj shows
vtime_base_rate.
2) In function iocg_activate shows vtime_base by calling
TRACE_IOCG_PATH(iocg_activate...
3) In function ioc_check_iocgs shows vtime_base by calling
TRACE_IOCG_PATH(iocg_idle...
Trace vtime_base_rate instead of vtime_rate as:
1) Before commit ac33e91e2daca ("blk-iocost: implement vtime loss
compensation"), the traced rate is without compensation, so still
show rate without compensation.
2) The vtime_base_rate is more stable while vtime_rate heavily depends on
excess budeget on current period which may change abruptly in next period.
Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huawei.com>
---
block/blk-iocost.c | 2 +-
include/trace/events/iocost.h | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-iocost.c b/block/blk-iocost.c
index 9214733bbc14..b0991b52e3dd 100644
--- a/block/blk-iocost.c
+++ b/block/blk-iocost.c
@@ -977,7 +977,7 @@ static void ioc_adjust_base_vrate(struct ioc *ioc, u32 rq_wait_pct,
if (!ioc->busy_level || (ioc->busy_level < 0 && nr_lagging)) {
if (ioc->busy_level != prev_busy_level || nr_lagging)
- trace_iocost_ioc_vrate_adj(ioc, atomic64_read(&ioc->vtime_rate),
+ trace_iocost_ioc_vrate_adj(ioc, vrate,
missed_ppm, rq_wait_pct,
nr_lagging, nr_shortages);
diff --git a/include/trace/events/iocost.h b/include/trace/events/iocost.h
index 6d1626e7a4ce..af8bfed528fc 100644
--- a/include/trace/events/iocost.h
+++ b/include/trace/events/iocost.h
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(iocost_iocg_state,
__assign_str(cgroup, path);
__entry->now = now->now;
__entry->vnow = now->vnow;
- __entry->vrate = now->vrate;
+ __entry->vrate = iocg->ioc->vtime_base_rate;
__entry->last_period = last_period;
__entry->cur_period = cur_period;
__entry->vtime = vtime;
@@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ TRACE_EVENT(iocost_ioc_vrate_adj,
TP_fast_assign(
__assign_str(devname, ioc_name(ioc));
- __entry->old_vrate = atomic64_read(&ioc->vtime_rate);
+ __entry->old_vrate = ioc->vtime_base_rate;
__entry->new_vrate = new_vrate;
__entry->busy_level = ioc->busy_level;
__entry->read_missed_ppm = missed_ppm[READ];
--
2.30.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 3/8] blk-iocost: Trace vtime_base_rate instead of vtime_rate
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 3/8] blk-iocost: Trace vtime_base_rate instead of vtime_rate Kemeng Shi
@ 2022-10-17 19:03 ` Tejun Heo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Tejun Heo @ 2022-10-17 19:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kemeng Shi; +Cc: axboe, linux-block, linux-kernel
On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 10:00:06AM +0800, Kemeng Shi wrote:
> Since commit ac33e91e2daca ("blk-iocost: implement vtime loss
> compensation") rename original vtime_base to vtime_base_rate
> and current vtime_base is original vtime_base with compensation.
^
vtime_rate
There are multiple places with the same mistake. Can you please fix the
patch description?
> The current rate showed in tracepoint is mixed with vtime_base
> and vtime_base_rate:
> 1) In function ioc_adjust_base_vrate, the first trace_iocost_ioc_vrate_adj
> shows vtime_base, the second trace_iocost_ioc_vrate_adj shows
> vtime_base_rate.
> 2) In function iocg_activate shows vtime_base by calling
> TRACE_IOCG_PATH(iocg_activate...
> 3) In function ioc_check_iocgs shows vtime_base by calling
> TRACE_IOCG_PATH(iocg_idle...
>
> Trace vtime_base_rate instead of vtime_rate as:
> 1) Before commit ac33e91e2daca ("blk-iocost: implement vtime loss
> compensation"), the traced rate is without compensation, so still
> show rate without compensation.
> 2) The vtime_base_rate is more stable while vtime_rate heavily depends on
> excess budeget on current period which may change abruptly in next period.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huawei.com>
Other than that,
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Thanks.
--
tejun
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 4/8] blk-iocost: Remove vrate member in struct ioc_now
2022-10-17 2:00 [PATCH 0/8] A few cleanup and bugfix patches for blk-iocost Kemeng Shi
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 3/8] blk-iocost: Trace vtime_base_rate instead of vtime_rate Kemeng Shi
@ 2022-10-17 2:00 ` Kemeng Shi
2022-10-17 19:08 ` Tejun Heo
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 5/8] blk-iocost: Correct comment in blk_iocost_init Kemeng Shi
` (3 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Kemeng Shi @ 2022-10-17 2:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tj, axboe, linux-block, linux-kernel; +Cc: shikemeng
If we trace vtime_base_rate instead of vtime_rate, there is nowhere to
access now->vrate except function ioc_now using now->vrate locally.
Just clean it.
Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huawei.com>
---
block/blk-iocost.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-iocost.c b/block/blk-iocost.c
index b0991b52e3dd..761295ed9c5a 100644
--- a/block/blk-iocost.c
+++ b/block/blk-iocost.c
@@ -556,7 +556,6 @@ struct ioc_now {
u64 now_ns;
u64 now;
u64 vnow;
- u64 vrate;
};
struct iocg_wait {
@@ -1020,10 +1019,11 @@ static void ioc_adjust_base_vrate(struct ioc *ioc, u32 rq_wait_pct,
static void ioc_now(struct ioc *ioc, struct ioc_now *now)
{
unsigned seq;
+ u64 vrate;
now->now_ns = ktime_get();
now->now = ktime_to_us(now->now_ns);
- now->vrate = atomic64_read(&ioc->vtime_rate);
+ vrate = atomic64_read(&ioc->vtime_rate);
/*
* The current vtime is
@@ -1036,7 +1036,7 @@ static void ioc_now(struct ioc *ioc, struct ioc_now *now)
do {
seq = read_seqcount_begin(&ioc->period_seqcount);
now->vnow = ioc->period_at_vtime +
- (now->now - ioc->period_at) * now->vrate;
+ (now->now - ioc->period_at) * vrate;
} while (read_seqcount_retry(&ioc->period_seqcount, seq));
}
--
2.30.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [PATCH 5/8] blk-iocost: Correct comment in blk_iocost_init
2022-10-17 2:00 [PATCH 0/8] A few cleanup and bugfix patches for blk-iocost Kemeng Shi
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 4/8] blk-iocost: Remove vrate member in struct ioc_now Kemeng Shi
@ 2022-10-17 2:00 ` Kemeng Shi
2022-10-17 19:10 ` Tejun Heo
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 6/8] blk-iocost: Avoid to call current_hweight_max if iocg->inuse == iocg->active Kemeng Shi
` (2 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Kemeng Shi @ 2022-10-17 2:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tj, axboe, linux-block, linux-kernel; +Cc: shikemeng
There is no iocg_pd_init function. The pd_alloc_fn function pointer of
iocost policy is set with ioc_pd_init. Just correct it.
Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huawei.com>
---
block/blk-iocost.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-iocost.c b/block/blk-iocost.c
index 761295ed9c5a..96c1571a8a1d 100644
--- a/block/blk-iocost.c
+++ b/block/blk-iocost.c
@@ -2880,7 +2880,7 @@ static int blk_iocost_init(struct gendisk *disk)
spin_unlock_irq(&ioc->lock);
/*
- * rqos must be added before activation to allow iocg_pd_init() to
+ * rqos must be added before activation to allow ioc_pd_init() to
* lookup the ioc from q. This means that the rqos methods may get
* called before policy activation completion, can't assume that the
* target bio has an iocg associated and need to test for NULL iocg.
--
2.30.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [PATCH 6/8] blk-iocost: Avoid to call current_hweight_max if iocg->inuse == iocg->active
2022-10-17 2:00 [PATCH 0/8] A few cleanup and bugfix patches for blk-iocost Kemeng Shi
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 5/8] blk-iocost: Correct comment in blk_iocost_init Kemeng Shi
@ 2022-10-17 2:00 ` Kemeng Shi
2022-10-17 19:15 ` Tejun Heo
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 7/8] blk-iocost: Remove redundant initialization of struct ioc_gq Kemeng Shi
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 8/8] blk-iocost: Get ioc_now inside weight_updated Kemeng Shi
7 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Kemeng Shi @ 2022-10-17 2:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tj, axboe, linux-block, linux-kernel; +Cc: shikemeng
The old_hwi is already max hweight_inuse if iocg->inuse == iocg->active.
Remove unnecessary calculation.
Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huawei.com>
---
block/blk-iocost.c | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-iocost.c b/block/blk-iocost.c
index 96c1571a8a1d..fa90f471dfdc 100644
--- a/block/blk-iocost.c
+++ b/block/blk-iocost.c
@@ -2299,7 +2299,10 @@ static void ioc_timer_fn(struct timer_list *timer)
* Determine the donation amount.
*/
current_hweight(iocg, &hwa, &old_hwi);
- hwm = current_hweight_max(iocg);
+ if (iocg->inuse == iocg->active)
+ hwm = old_hwi;
+ else
+ hwm = current_hweight_max(iocg);
new_hwi = hweight_after_donation(iocg, old_hwi, hwm,
usage, &now);
/*
--
2.30.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6/8] blk-iocost: Avoid to call current_hweight_max if iocg->inuse == iocg->active
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 6/8] blk-iocost: Avoid to call current_hweight_max if iocg->inuse == iocg->active Kemeng Shi
@ 2022-10-17 19:15 ` Tejun Heo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Tejun Heo @ 2022-10-17 19:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kemeng Shi; +Cc: axboe, linux-block, linux-kernel
On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 10:00:09AM +0800, Kemeng Shi wrote:
> The old_hwi is already max hweight_inuse if iocg->inuse == iocg->active.
> Remove unnecessary calculation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huawei.com>
> ---
> block/blk-iocost.c | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-iocost.c b/block/blk-iocost.c
> index 96c1571a8a1d..fa90f471dfdc 100644
> --- a/block/blk-iocost.c
> +++ b/block/blk-iocost.c
> @@ -2299,7 +2299,10 @@ static void ioc_timer_fn(struct timer_list *timer)
> * Determine the donation amount.
> */
> current_hweight(iocg, &hwa, &old_hwi);
> - hwm = current_hweight_max(iocg);
> + if (iocg->inuse == iocg->active)
> + hwm = old_hwi;
> + else
> + hwm = current_hweight_max(iocg);
I don't think this is correct. The intermediate nodes might be donating.
This also isn't a meaningful optimization given that it's in the cold
periodic timer path. I'd much rather keep the code simpler unless the
performance benfeit can be clearly demonstrated.
Thanks.
--
tejun
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 7/8] blk-iocost: Remove redundant initialization of struct ioc_gq
2022-10-17 2:00 [PATCH 0/8] A few cleanup and bugfix patches for blk-iocost Kemeng Shi
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 6/8] blk-iocost: Avoid to call current_hweight_max if iocg->inuse == iocg->active Kemeng Shi
@ 2022-10-17 2:00 ` Kemeng Shi
2022-10-17 19:16 ` Tejun Heo
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 8/8] blk-iocost: Get ioc_now inside weight_updated Kemeng Shi
7 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Kemeng Shi @ 2022-10-17 2:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tj, axboe, linux-block, linux-kernel; +Cc: shikemeng
Some member of struct ioc_gq will not be accessed before it's
first activation and will be initialized again in it's first
activation after ioc_pd_init. To be more specific:
1)Member iocg->vtime and iocg->done_vtime will set to target in
activation which only expects vtime is equal to done_vtime in
first activation.
2)Member iocg->active_period will be set with ioc->cur_period
again in first activation.
Remove the redundant initialization to improve ioc_pd_init a
littile bit.
The parameter now of weight_updated will not be used if iocg is
not active, so pass NULL to weight_update here is safe and we
can remove call to ioc_now.
Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huawei.com>
---
block/blk-iocost.c | 8 +-------
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-iocost.c b/block/blk-iocost.c
index fa90f471dfdc..4815e676733d 100644
--- a/block/blk-iocost.c
+++ b/block/blk-iocost.c
@@ -2946,16 +2946,10 @@ static void ioc_pd_init(struct blkg_policy_data *pd)
struct ioc_gq *iocg = pd_to_iocg(pd);
struct blkcg_gq *blkg = pd_to_blkg(&iocg->pd);
struct ioc *ioc = q_to_ioc(blkg->q);
- struct ioc_now now;
struct blkcg_gq *tblkg;
unsigned long flags;
- ioc_now(ioc, &now);
-
iocg->ioc = ioc;
- atomic64_set(&iocg->vtime, now.vnow);
- atomic64_set(&iocg->done_vtime, now.vnow);
- atomic64_set(&iocg->active_period, atomic64_read(&ioc->cur_period));
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&iocg->active_list);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&iocg->walk_list);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&iocg->surplus_list);
@@ -2974,7 +2968,7 @@ static void ioc_pd_init(struct blkg_policy_data *pd)
}
spin_lock_irqsave(&ioc->lock, flags);
- weight_updated(iocg, &now);
+ weight_updated(iocg, NULL);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ioc->lock, flags);
}
--
2.30.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 7/8] blk-iocost: Remove redundant initialization of struct ioc_gq
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 7/8] blk-iocost: Remove redundant initialization of struct ioc_gq Kemeng Shi
@ 2022-10-17 19:16 ` Tejun Heo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Tejun Heo @ 2022-10-17 19:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kemeng Shi; +Cc: axboe, linux-block, linux-kernel
On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 10:00:10AM +0800, Kemeng Shi wrote:
> Some member of struct ioc_gq will not be accessed before it's
> first activation and will be initialized again in it's first
> activation after ioc_pd_init. To be more specific:
> 1)Member iocg->vtime and iocg->done_vtime will set to target in
> activation which only expects vtime is equal to done_vtime in
> first activation.
> 2)Member iocg->active_period will be set with ioc->cur_period
> again in first activation.
>
> Remove the redundant initialization to improve ioc_pd_init a
> littile bit.
>
> The parameter now of weight_updated will not be used if iocg is
> not active, so pass NULL to weight_update here is safe and we
> can remove call to ioc_now.
This isn't a meaningful optimization and makes the code fragile for no
practical gain. Let's not do this.
Thanks.
--
tejun
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 8/8] blk-iocost: Get ioc_now inside weight_updated
2022-10-17 2:00 [PATCH 0/8] A few cleanup and bugfix patches for blk-iocost Kemeng Shi
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2022-10-17 2:00 ` [PATCH 7/8] blk-iocost: Remove redundant initialization of struct ioc_gq Kemeng Shi
@ 2022-10-17 2:00 ` Kemeng Shi
2022-10-17 19:19 ` Tejun Heo
7 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Kemeng Shi @ 2022-10-17 2:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tj, axboe, linux-block, linux-kernel; +Cc: shikemeng
The ioc_now parameter of weight_updated is only needed if we need call
propagate_weights. Move ioc_now inside weight_updated to remove
unnecessary get of ioc_now from outside of weight_updated.
Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huawei.com>
---
block/blk-iocost.c | 18 +++++++++---------
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-iocost.c b/block/blk-iocost.c
index 4815e676733d..e2aaf133deb8 100644
--- a/block/blk-iocost.c
+++ b/block/blk-iocost.c
@@ -1220,18 +1220,21 @@ static u32 current_hweight_max(struct ioc_gq *iocg)
return max_t(u32, hwm, 1);
}
-static void weight_updated(struct ioc_gq *iocg, struct ioc_now *now)
+static void weight_updated(struct ioc_gq *iocg)
{
struct ioc *ioc = iocg->ioc;
struct blkcg_gq *blkg = iocg_to_blkg(iocg);
struct ioc_cgrp *iocc = blkcg_to_iocc(blkg->blkcg);
+ struct ioc_now now;
u32 weight;
lockdep_assert_held(&ioc->lock);
weight = iocg->cfg_weight ?: iocc->dfl_weight;
- if (weight != iocg->weight && iocg->active)
- propagate_weights(iocg, weight, iocg->inuse, true, now);
+ if (weight != iocg->weight && iocg->active) {
+ ioc_now(iocg->ioc, &now);
+ propagate_weights(iocg, weight, iocg->inuse, true, &now);
+ }
iocg->weight = weight;
}
@@ -2968,7 +2971,7 @@ static void ioc_pd_init(struct blkg_policy_data *pd)
}
spin_lock_irqsave(&ioc->lock, flags);
- weight_updated(iocg, NULL);
+ weight_updated(iocg);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ioc->lock, flags);
}
@@ -3053,7 +3056,6 @@ static ssize_t ioc_weight_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of, char *buf,
struct blkcg *blkcg = css_to_blkcg(of_css(of));
struct ioc_cgrp *iocc = blkcg_to_iocc(blkcg);
struct blkg_conf_ctx ctx;
- struct ioc_now now;
struct ioc_gq *iocg;
u32 v;
int ret;
@@ -3074,8 +3076,7 @@ static ssize_t ioc_weight_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of, char *buf,
if (iocg) {
spin_lock(&iocg->ioc->lock);
- ioc_now(iocg->ioc, &now);
- weight_updated(iocg, &now);
+ weight_updated(iocg);
spin_unlock(&iocg->ioc->lock);
}
}
@@ -3101,8 +3102,7 @@ static ssize_t ioc_weight_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of, char *buf,
spin_lock(&iocg->ioc->lock);
iocg->cfg_weight = v * WEIGHT_ONE;
- ioc_now(iocg->ioc, &now);
- weight_updated(iocg, &now);
+ weight_updated(iocg);
spin_unlock(&iocg->ioc->lock);
blkg_conf_finish(&ctx);
--
2.30.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread