| Message ID | 20230219104309.1511562-2-shikemeng@huaweicloud.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Some bugfix and cleanup patches for bfq | expand |
diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c index 777dcab73c8e..3f5c740664ce 100644 --- a/block/bfq-iosched.c +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c @@ -4420,8 +4420,8 @@ void bfq_bfqq_expire(struct bfq_data *bfqd, /* mark bfqq as waiting a request only if a bic still points to it */ if (!bfq_bfqq_busy(bfqq) && - reason != BFQQE_BUDGET_TIMEOUT && - reason != BFQQE_BUDGET_EXHAUSTED) { + reason == BFQQE_NO_MORE_REQUESTS && + reason == BFQQE_TOO_IDLE) { bfq_mark_bfqq_non_blocking_wait_rq(bfqq); /* * Not setting service to 0, because, if the next rq
Bfqq activation will try to recover the "service hole" of bfqq which may issues requests greedily while remained idle for other reasons: CPU high load, bfqq not enjoying idling, I/O throttling somewhere in the path from the process to the I/O scheduler. So we should mark bfqq remained idle when expired for two reasons: BFQQE_NO_MORE_REQUESTS or BFQQE_TOO_IDLE. More details can be found in comment of bfq_bfqq_update_budg_for_activation. So we should mark bfqq remained idle expired for BFQQE_NO_MORE_REQUESTS or BFQQE_TOO_IDLE instead of (reason != BFQQE_BUDGET_TIMEOUT && reason != BFQQE_BUDGET_EXHAUSTED). Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huaweicloud.com> --- block/bfq-iosched.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)