[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d2875648-20d9-43b9-abf1-8ecbf049c4bf@wdc.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 16:21:05 -0800
From: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@....com>
To: Max Gurtovoy <maxg@...lanox.com>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>
Cc: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"dledford@...hat.com" <dledford@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"leonro@...lanox.com" <leonro@...lanox.com>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RDMA/core: reduce IB_POLL_BATCH constant
On 02/27/18 14:15, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
> -static int __ib_process_cq(struct ib_cq *cq, int budget, struct ib_wc
> *poll_wc)
> +static int __ib_process_cq(struct ib_cq *cq, int budget, struct ib_wc
> *poll_wc,
> + int batch)
> {
> - int i, n, completed = 0;
> - struct ib_wc *wcs = poll_wc ? : cq->wc;
> + int i, n, ib_poll_batch, completed = 0;
> + struct ib_wc *wcs;
> +
> + if (poll_wc) {
> + wcs = poll_wc;
> + ib_poll_batch = batch;
> + } else {
> + wcs = cq->wc;
> + ib_poll_batch = IB_POLL_BATCH;
> + }
Since this code has to be touched I think that we can use this
opportunity to get rid of the "poll_wc ? : cq->wc" conditional and
instead use what the caller passes. That will require to update all
__ib_process_cq(..., ..., NULL) calls. I also propose to let the caller
pass ib_poll_batch instead of figuring it out in this function.
Otherwise the approach of this patch looks fine to me.
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists