[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1343255394.5132.145.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 23:29:54 +0100
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<oren@...lanox.com>, <amirv@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND net] net/mlx4_en: Limit the RFS filter IDs to be
< RPS_NO_FILTER
On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 15:23 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>
> Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:04:35 +0300
>
> > On 25/07/2012 17:57, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> >>> @@ -77,12 +77,8 @@ int mlx4_en_activate_cq(struct mlx4_en_priv *priv,
> >>> struct mlx4_en_cq *cq,
> >>> struct mlx4_en_dev *mdev = priv->mdev;
> >>> int err = 0;
> >>> char name[25];
> >>> - struct cpu_rmap *rmap =
> >>> -#ifdef CONFIG_RFS_ACCEL
> >>> - priv->dev->rx_cpu_rmap;
> >>> -#else
> >>> - NULL;
> >>> -#endif
> >>> + struct cpu_rmap *rmap = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RFS_ACCEL) ?
> >>> + priv->dev->rx_cpu_rmap : NULL;
> >>
> >> This is a separate change.
> >
> > OK, will send two patches
>
> This change breaks the build.
>
> You can't do this check at run-time, because the reason you need to
> check CONFIG_RFS_ACCEL is because if that's disabled then the netdev
> structure doesn't even have the ->rx_cpu_rmap member.
Yes, sorry for suggesting that, Or.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists