[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 08:32:13 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>
Cc: linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rfc 2/6] mlx5: move affinity hints assignments to
generic code
> @@ -1375,7 +1375,8 @@ static void mlx5e_close_cq(struct mlx5e_cq *cq)
>
> static int mlx5e_get_cpu(struct mlx5e_priv *priv, int ix)
> {
> - return cpumask_first(priv->mdev->priv.irq_info[ix].mask);
> + return cpumask_first(pci_irq_get_affinity(priv->mdev->pdev,
> + MLX5_EQ_VEC_COMP_BASE + ix));
This looks ok for now, but if we look at the callers we'd probably
want to make direct use of pci_irq_get_node and pci_irq_get_affinity for
the uses directly in mlx5e_open_channel as well as the stored away
->cpu field. But maybe that should be left for another patch after
this one.
> + struct irq_affinity irqdesc = { .pre_vectors = MLX5_EQ_VEC_COMP_BASE, };
I usually move assignments inside structures onto a separate line to make
it more readable, e.g.
struct irq_affinity irqdesc = {
.pre_vectors = MLX5_EQ_VEC_COMP_BASE,
};
Otherwise this looks fine:
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists