lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <efc0302c-90e2-2e09-7525-dc9b9e247e73@mellanox.com>
Date:   Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:36:50 +0200
From:   Max Gurtovoy <maxg@...lanox.com>
To:     Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@....com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>
CC:     Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
        "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
        "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 2/28/2018 8:55 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-02-28 at 11:50 +0200, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
>>
>> On 2/28/2018 2:21 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>>> 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.
>> I'll make these changes and submit.
> 
> That sounds reasonable to me too, thanks for reworking and resubmitting.
> 

Sure, NP.
We've run NVMe-oF and SRP with the new patch.
I'll send it through Mellanox maintainers pull request.

Thanks for reporting and reviewing.

-Max.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ