[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190626113726.GB27420@f1>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 20:37:26 +0900
From: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@...e.com>
To: Manish Chopra <manishc@...vell.com>
Cc: GR-Linux-NIC-Dev <GR-Linux-NIC-Dev@...vell.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [EXT] [PATCH net-next 03/16] qlge: Deduplicate lbq_buf_size
On 2019/06/26 09:24, Manish Chopra wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@...e.com>
> > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2019 1:19 PM
> > To: Manish Chopra <manishc@...vell.com>; GR-Linux-NIC-Dev <GR-Linux-
> > NIC-Dev@...vell.com>; netdev@...r.kernel.org
> > Subject: [EXT] [PATCH net-next 03/16] qlge: Deduplicate lbq_buf_size
> >
> > External Email
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > lbq_buf_size is duplicated to every rx_ring structure whereas lbq_buf_order is
> > present once in the ql_adapter structure. All rings use the same buf size, keep
> > only one copy of it. Also factor out the calculation of lbq_buf_size instead of
> > having two copies.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@...e.com>
> > ---
[...]
>
> Not sure if this change is really required, I think fields relevant to rx_ring should be present in the rx_ring structure.
> There are various other fields like "lbq_len" and "lbq_size" which would be same for all rx rings but still under the relevant rx_ring structure.
Indeed, those members are also removed by this patch series, in patch 11.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists