blk-throttle: simpfy low limit reached check in throtl_tg_can_upgrade

blk-throttle: simpfy low limit reached check in throtl_tg_can_upgrade

Commit c79892c557616 ("blk-throttle: add upgrade logic for LIMIT_LOW
state") added upgrade logic for low limit and methioned that
1. "To determine if a cgroup exceeds its limitation, we check if the cgroup
has pending request. Since cgroup is throttled according to the limit,
pending request means the cgroup reaches the limit."
2. "If a cgroup has limit set for both read and write, we consider the
combination of them for upgrade. The reason is read IO and write IO can
interfere with each other. If we do the upgrade based in one direction IO,
the other direction IO could be severly harmed."
Besides, we also determine that cgroup reaches low limit if low limit is 0,
see comment in throtl_tg_can_upgrade.

Collect the information above, the desgin of upgrade check is as following:
1.The low limit is reached if limit is zero or io is already queued.
2.Cgroup will pass upgrade check if low limits of READ and WRITE are both
reached.

Simpfy the check code described above to removce repeat check and improve
readability. There is no functional change.

Detail equivalence proof is as following:
All replaced conditions to return true are as following:
condition 1
  (!read_limit && !write_limit)
condition 2
  read_limit && sq->nr_queued[READ] &&
  (!write_limit || sq->nr_queued[WRITE])
condition 3
  write_limit && sq->nr_queued[WRITE] &&
  (!read_limit || sq->nr_queued[READ])

Transferring condition 2 as following:
  (read_limit && sq->nr_queued[READ]) &&
  (!write_limit || sq->nr_queued[WRITE])
is equivalent to
  (read_limit && sq->nr_queued[READ]) &&
  (!write_limit || (write_limit && sq->nr_queued[WRITE]))
is equivalent to
condition 2.1
  (read_limit && sq->nr_queued[READ] &&
  !write_limit) ||
condition 2.2
  (read_limit && sq->nr_queued[READ] &&
  (write_limit && sq->nr_queued[WRITE]))

Transferring condition 3 as following:
  write_limit && sq->nr_queued[WRITE] &&
  (!read_limit || sq->nr_queued[READ])
is equivalent to
  (write_limit && sq->nr_queued[WRITE]) &&
  (!read_limit || (read_limit && sq->nr_queued[READ]))
is equivalent to
condition 3.1
  ((write_limit && sq->nr_queued[WRITE]) &&
  !read_limit) ||
condition 3.2
  ((write_limit && sq->nr_queued[WRITE]) &&
  (read_limit && sq->nr_queued[READ]))

Condition 3.2 is the same as condition 2.2, so all conditions we get to
return are as following:
  (!read_limit && !write_limit) (1)
  (!read_limit && (write_limit && sq->nr_queued[WRITE])) (3.1)
  ((read_limit && sq->nr_queued[READ]) && !write_limit) (2.1)
  ((write_limit && sq->nr_queued[WRITE]) &&
  (read_limit && sq->nr_queued[READ])) (2.2)

As we can extract conditions "(a1 || a2) && (b1 || b2)" to:
a1 && b1
a1 && b2
a2 && b1
ab && b2

Considering that:
a1 = !read_limit
a2 = read_limit && sq->nr_queued[READ]
b1 = !write_limit
b2 = write_limit && sq->nr_queued[WRITE]

We can pack replaced conditions to
  (!read_limit || (read_limit && sq->nr_queued[READ])) &&
  (!write_limit || (write_limit && sq->nr_queued[WRITE]))
which is equivalent to
  (!read_limit || sq->nr_queued[READ]) &&
  (!write_limit || sq->nr_queued[WRITE])

Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huawei.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221205115709.251489-6-shikemeng@huaweicloud.com
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>