[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191007124831.GA20840@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 05:48:31 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>,
RDMA mailing list <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
Yamin Friedman <yaminf@...lanox.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next v1 2/3] RDMA/rw: Support threshold for
registration vs scattering to local pages
On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 03:36:56PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > if (rdma_protocol_iwarp(dev, port_num) && dir == DMA_FROM_DEVICE)
> > > return true;
> > > + if (dev->attrs.max_sgl_rd && dir == DMA_FROM_DEVICE &&
> > > + dma_nents > dev->attrs.max_sgl_rd)
> > > + return true;
> >
> > This can be simplified to:
> >
> > if (dir == DMA_FROM_DEVICE &&
> > (rdma_protocol_iwarp(dev, port_num) ||
> > (dev->attrs.max_sgl_rd && dma_nents > dev->attrs.max_sgl_rd)))
> > return true;
>
> I don't think that it simplifies and wanted to make separate checks to
> be separated. For example, rdma_protocol_iwarp() has nothing to do with
> attrs.max_sgl_rd.
The important bit is to have the DMA_FROM_DEVICE check only once, as
we only do the registration for reads with either parameter. So if
you want it more verbose the wya would be:
if (dir == DMA_FROM_DEVICE) {
if (rdma_protocol_iwarp(dev, port_num))
return true;
if (dev->attrs.max_sgl_rd && dma_nents > dev->attrs.max_sgl_rd)
return true;
}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists