Since blk-ioprio handing was converted from a rqos policy to a direct call,
RQ_QOS_IOPRIO is not used anymore, just delete it.

Signed-off-by: Li Jinlin <lijinlin3@huawei.com>
---
 block/blk-mq-debugfs.c | 2 --
 block/blk-rq-qos.h     | 1 -
 2 files changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/blk-mq-debugfs.c b/block/blk-mq-debugfs.c
index dee789f2f98f..bd942341b638 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq-debugfs.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq-debugfs.c
@@ -807,8 +807,6 @@ static const char *rq_qos_id_to_name(enum rq_qos_id id)
 		return "latency";
 	case RQ_QOS_COST:
 		return "cost";
-	case RQ_QOS_IOPRIO:
-		return "ioprio";
 	}
 	return "unknown";
 }
diff --git a/block/blk-rq-qos.h b/block/blk-rq-qos.h
index 08b856570ad1..1ef1f7d4bc3c 100644
--- a/block/blk-rq-qos.h
+++ b/block/blk-rq-qos.h
@@ -17,7 +17,6 @@ enum rq_qos_id {
 	RQ_QOS_WBT,
 	RQ_QOS_LATENCY,
 	RQ_QOS_COST,
-	RQ_QOS_IOPRIO,
 };
 
 struct rq_wait {
-- 
2.23.0

On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 10:32:41 +0800, Li Jinlin wrote:
> Since blk-ioprio handing was converted from a rqos policy to a direct call,
> RQ_QOS_IOPRIO is not used anymore, just delete it.
> 
> 

Applied, thanks!

[1/1] block/blk-rq-qos: delete useless enmu RQ_QOS_IOPRIO
      commit: 9713a67067897a9e372c52124f72f8e00b2e6031

Best regards,
-- 
Jens Axboe

On 9/15/22 19:32, Li Jinlin wrote:
> Since blk-ioprio handing was converted from a rqos policy to a direct call,
> RQ_QOS_IOPRIO is not used anymore, just delete it.

(+Jan Kara)

Jan, please Cc me on future blk-ioprio patches - I just noticed that I 
was not Cc-ed on commit 82b74cac2849 ("blk-ioprio: Convert from rqos 
policy to direct call").

Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>

On Fri 16-09-22 07:12:23, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 9/15/22 19:32, Li Jinlin wrote:
> > Since blk-ioprio handing was converted from a rqos policy to a direct call,
> > RQ_QOS_IOPRIO is not used anymore, just delete it.
> 
> (+Jan Kara)

Thanks! The patch looks good so feel free to add:

Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>

> Jan, please Cc me on future blk-ioprio patches - I just noticed that I was
> not Cc-ed on commit 82b74cac2849 ("blk-ioprio: Convert from rqos policy to
> direct call").

Well, you were on CC of the whole patchset which this patch was part of - see
[1]. So maybe you've missed it among other patches.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220623074450.30550-1-jack@suse.cz/

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR

On 9/16/22 14:58, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Fri 16-09-22 07:12:23, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> Jan, please Cc me on future blk-ioprio patches - I just noticed that I was
>> not Cc-ed on commit 82b74cac2849 ("blk-ioprio: Convert from rqos policy to
>> direct call").
> 
> Well, you were on CC of the whole patchset which this patch was part of - see
> [1]. So maybe you've missed it among other patches.
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220623074450.30550-1-jack@suse.cz/

Hi Jan,

Hmm, you are right. Looking back at that patch series, what I remember 
is that I looked at the first two patches, noticed that these were 
outside my area of expertise and skipped the other patches. I will pay 
more attention in the future.

Bart.

On 9/15/2022 7:32 PM, Li Jinlin wrote:
> Since blk-ioprio handing was converted from a rqos policy to a direct call,
> RQ_QOS_IOPRIO is not used anymore, just delete it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Li Jinlin <lijinlin3@huawei.com>
>

Perhaps mention about when it was removed.

Either way,

Reviewed-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>

-ck