On 24/02/2020 18:57, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 2/24/20 8:48 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> On 24/02/2020 18:30, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 2/24/20 1:30 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>>> io_prep_async_worker() called io_wq_assign_next() do many useless checks:
>>>> io_req_work_grab_env() was already called during prep, and @do_hashed
>>>> is not ever used. Add io_prep_next_work() -- simplified version, that
>>>> can be called io-wq.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  fs/io_uring.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
>>>>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
>>>> index 819661f49023..3003e767ced3 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/io_uring.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c
>>>> @@ -955,6 +955,17 @@ static inline void io_req_work_drop_env(struct io_kiocb *req)
>>>>  	}
>>>>  }
>>>>  
>>>> +static inline void io_prep_next_work(struct io_kiocb *req,
>>>> +				     struct io_kiocb **link)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	const struct io_op_def *def = &io_op_defs[req->opcode];
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (!(req->flags & REQ_F_ISREG) && def->unbound_nonreg_file)
>>>> +			req->work.flags |= IO_WQ_WORK_UNBOUND;
>>>
>>> Extra tab?
>>
>> Yep. Would resending [2/3] be enough?
> 
> No need, I just did a hand edit of the patch before applying.

Great, appreciate that

-- 
Pavel Begunkov