Re: [PATCH V3 4/4] scsi: storvsc: Tighten up the interrupt path

[Hannes Reinecke]

On 12/13/2015 09:28 PM, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote:
> On the interrupt path, we repeatedly establish the pointer to the
> storvsc_device. Fix this.
>
> Signed-off-by: K. Y. Srinivasan <kys@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Long Li <longli@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@xxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Alex Ng <alexng@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>   drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c |   23 ++++++++---------------
>   1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c b/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c
> index d6ca4f2..b68aebe 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c
> @@ -945,19 +945,16 @@ static void storvsc_handle_error(struct vmscsi_request *vm_srb,
>   }
>
>
> -static void storvsc_command_completion(struct storvsc_cmd_request *cmd_request)
> +static void storvsc_command_completion(struct storvsc_cmd_request *cmd_request,
> +				       struct storvsc_device *stor_dev)
>   {
>   	struct scsi_cmnd *scmnd = cmd_request->cmd;
> -	struct hv_host_device *host_dev = shost_priv(scmnd->device->host);
>   	struct scsi_sense_hdr sense_hdr;
>   	struct vmscsi_request *vm_srb;
>   	struct Scsi_Host *host;
> -	struct storvsc_device *stor_dev;
> -	struct hv_device *dev = host_dev->dev;
>   	u32 payload_sz = cmd_request->payload_sz;
>   	void *payload = cmd_request->payload;
>
> -	stor_dev = get_in_stor_device(dev);
>   	host = stor_dev->host;
>
>   	vm_srb = &cmd_request->vstor_packet.vm_srb;
> @@ -987,14 +984,13 @@ static void storvsc_command_completion(struct storvsc_cmd_request *cmd_request)
>   		kfree(payload);
>   }
>
> -static void storvsc_on_io_completion(struct hv_device *device,
> +static void storvsc_on_io_completion(struct storvsc_device *stor_device,
>   				  struct vstor_packet *vstor_packet,
>   				  struct storvsc_cmd_request *request)
>   {
> -	struct storvsc_device *stor_device;
>   	struct vstor_packet *stor_pkt;
> +	struct hv_device *device = stor_device->device;
>
> -	stor_device = hv_get_drvdata(device);
>   	stor_pkt = &request->vstor_packet;
>
>   	/*
> @@ -1049,7 +1045,7 @@ static void storvsc_on_io_completion(struct hv_device *device,
>   	stor_pkt->vm_srb.data_transfer_length =
>   	vstor_packet->vm_srb.data_transfer_length;
>
> -	storvsc_command_completion(request);
> +	storvsc_command_completion(request, stor_device);
>
>   	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&stor_device->num_outstanding_req) &&
>   		stor_device->drain_notify)
> @@ -1058,21 +1054,19 @@ static void storvsc_on_io_completion(struct hv_device *device,
>
>   }
>
> -static void storvsc_on_receive(struct hv_device *device,
> +static void storvsc_on_receive(struct storvsc_device *stor_device,
>   			     struct vstor_packet *vstor_packet,
>   			     struct storvsc_cmd_request *request)
>   {
>   	struct storvsc_scan_work *work;
> -	struct storvsc_device *stor_device;
>
>   	switch (vstor_packet->operation) {
>   	case VSTOR_OPERATION_COMPLETE_IO:
> -		storvsc_on_io_completion(device, vstor_packet, request);
> +		storvsc_on_io_completion(stor_device, vstor_packet, request);
>   		break;
>
>   	case VSTOR_OPERATION_REMOVE_DEVICE:
>   	case VSTOR_OPERATION_ENUMERATE_BUS:
> -		stor_device = get_in_stor_device(device);
>   		work = kmalloc(sizeof(struct storvsc_scan_work), GFP_ATOMIC);
>   		if (!work)
>   			return;
> @@ -1083,7 +1077,6 @@ static void storvsc_on_receive(struct hv_device *device,
>   		break;
>
>   	case VSTOR_OPERATION_FCHBA_DATA:
> -		stor_device = get_in_stor_device(device);
>   		cache_wwn(stor_device, vstor_packet);
>   #ifdef CONFIG_SCSI_FC_ATTRS
>   		fc_host_node_name(stor_device->host) = stor_device->node_name;
> @@ -1133,7 +1126,7 @@ static void storvsc_on_channel_callback(void *context)
>   					vmscsi_size_delta));
>   				complete(&request->wait_event);
>   			} else {
> -				storvsc_on_receive(device,
> +				storvsc_on_receive(stor_device,
>   						(struct vstor_packet *)packet,
>   						request);
>   			}
Hmm. I would've thought the compiler optimizes this away. Have you 
checked whether it actually makes a difference in the assembler output?

Cheers,

Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke		               zSeries & Storage
hare@xxxxxxx			               +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/