[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190129075814.GC3604@mtr-leonro.mtl.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 07:58:17 +0000
From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>
To: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
CC: "saeedm@....mellanox.co.il" <saeedm@....mellanox.co.il>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mlx5-next 0/4] mlx5 next misc updates
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 07:11:01PM +0000, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> On Sun, 2019-01-27 at 07:51 +0000, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 10:08:00AM -0800, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 4:30 AM Leon Romanovsky <
> > > leonro@...lanox.com> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 04:33:09PM -0800, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > This series includes updates to mlx5-next shared branch.
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) from Jason, improve mlx5_cmd_exec_cb async API to be safer
> > > > > 2) from Maxim Mikityanskiy, cleanups for mlx5_write64 doorbell
> > > > > API
> > > > > 3) from Michael Guralnik, Add pci AtomicOps request
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Saeed.
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > > > Jason Gunthorpe (1):
> > > > > net/mlx5: Make mlx5_cmd_exec_cb() a safe API
> > > > >
> > > > > Michael Guralnik (1):
> > > > > net/mlx5: Add pci AtomicOps request
> > > >
> > > > Those two were applied to mlx5-next branch.
> > > >
> > > > ce4eee5340a9 (mlx5-next) net/mlx5: Add pci AtomicOps request
> > > > e355477ed9e4 net/mlx5: Make mlx5_cmd_exec_cb() a safe API
> > > >
> > > > > Maxim Mikityanskiy (2):
> > > > > net/mlx5: Remove unused MLX5_*_DOORBELL_LOCK macros
> > > > > net/mlx5: Remove spinlock support from mlx5_write64
> > > >
> > > > Those two needs extra work,
> > >
> > > What extra work ?
> >
> > You got two comments for area you are touching:
> > 1. Replace _rww writes to something else.
>
> Not related to this cleanup patchset.
>
> > 2. Protect with spinlock 32-bits writes instead of ignoring it.
>
> Same as above, I already explained this.
>
> >
> > Both of those changes will touch the same 2-4 lines and there
> > is very little benefit in creating more than one-two patches
> > just for that.
> >
>
> Future work, as it needs verification and careful testing.
>
> Leon I would like to move on with those 2 small cleanup patches, no
> functionality change here, please confirm you are ok with them.
At least write large and scary comment that this mode was always broken.
>
> Thanks,
> Saeed.
>
> > Thanks
> >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > 2.20.1
> > > > >
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists