Re: [PATCH 16/19] staging: lustre: use explicit poll loop in ptlrpc_unregister_reply

[James Simmons]

> replace l_wait_event() with wait_event_idle_timeout() and explicit
> loop.  This approach is easier to understand.

Reviewed-by: James Simmons <jsimmons@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 
> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/client.c |   14 +++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/client.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/client.c
> index f70176c6db08..ffdd3ffd62c6 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/client.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/client.c
> @@ -2500,7 +2500,6 @@ static int ptlrpc_unregister_reply(struct ptlrpc_request *request, int async)
>  {
>  	int rc;
>  	wait_queue_head_t *wq;
> -	struct l_wait_info lwi;
>  
>  	/* Might sleep. */
>  	LASSERT(!in_interrupt());
> @@ -2543,16 +2542,17 @@ static int ptlrpc_unregister_reply(struct ptlrpc_request *request, int async)
>  		 * Network access will complete in finite time but the HUGE
>  		 * timeout lets us CWARN for visibility of sluggish NALs
>  		 */
> -		lwi = LWI_TIMEOUT_INTERVAL(LONG_UNLINK * HZ,
> -					   HZ, NULL, NULL);
> -		rc = l_wait_event(*wq, !ptlrpc_client_recv_or_unlink(request),
> -				  &lwi);
> -		if (rc == 0) {
> +		int cnt = 0;
> +		while (cnt < LONG_UNLINK &&
> +		       (rc = wait_event_idle_timeout(*wq,
> +						     !ptlrpc_client_recv_or_unlink(request),
> +						     HZ)) == 0)
> +			cnt += 1;
> +		if (rc > 0) {
>  			ptlrpc_rqphase_move(request, request->rq_next_phase);
>  			return 1;
>  		}
>  
> -		LASSERT(rc == -ETIMEDOUT);
>  		DEBUG_REQ(D_WARNING, request,
>  			  "Unexpectedly long timeout receiving_reply=%d req_ulinked=%d reply_unlinked=%d",
>  			  request->rq_receiving_reply,
> 
> 
>