[PATCH rfc 2/6] nvme-pci: Add budget to __nvme_process_cq
Johannes Thumshirn
jthumshirn at suse.de
Wed Oct 5 06:26:20 PDT 2016
On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 12:42:10PM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> Prepare for irq-poll logic where we budget the completion queue
> processing context.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sagi Grimberg <sagi at grimberg.me>
> ---
> drivers/nvme/host/pci.c | 9 ++++++---
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c b/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
> index 1d8b35a319d0..85bfd76fbee9 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
> @@ -705,7 +705,7 @@ static inline int nvme_read_cqe(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq,
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int __nvme_process_cq(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq, int *tag)
> +static int __nvme_process_cq(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq, int budget, int *tag)
> {
> struct nvme_completion cqe;
> int consumed = 0;
> @@ -713,6 +713,9 @@ static int __nvme_process_cq(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq, int *tag)
> while (nvme_read_cqe(nvmeq, &cqe)) {
> nvme_handle_cqe(nvmeq, &cqe);
>
> + if (++consumed == budget)
> + break;
> +
Ah here it is. Wouldn't it make sense to add a ++consumed dummy statement in
the previous patch (or maybe even a 'if (++consumed == INT_MAX) break;')? Just
a suggestion.
--
Johannes Thumshirn Storage
jthumshirn at suse.de +49 911 74053 689
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Key fingerprint = EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850
More information about the Linux-nvme
mailing list