[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210729180855.GA2401905@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2021 15:08:55 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc: Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Aharon Landau <aharonl@...dia.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
Shay Drory <shayd@...dia.com>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH mlx5-next 1/5] RDMA/mlx5: Replace struct mlx5_core_mkey
by u32 key
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 03:08:19PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mr.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mr.c
> index 03dc6c22843f..ae0472d92801 100644
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mr.c
> @@ -89,24 +89,39 @@ static void set_mkc_access_pd_addr_fields(void *mkc, int acc, u64 start_addr,
> MLX5_SET64(mkc, mkc, start_addr, start_addr);
> }
>
> -static void
> -assign_mkey_variant(struct mlx5_ib_dev *dev, struct mlx5_core_mkey *mkey,
> - u32 *in)
> +static void assign_mkey_variant(struct mlx5_ib_dev *dev, u32 *mkey, u32 *in)
> {
> u8 key = atomic_inc_return(&dev->mkey_var);
> void *mkc;
>
> mkc = MLX5_ADDR_OF(create_mkey_in, in, memory_key_mkey_entry);
> MLX5_SET(mkc, mkc, mkey_7_0, key);
> - mkey->key = key;
> + *mkey = key;
> +}
Can this be tidied please? We set both mkey_7_0 and mkey then pass
them into mlx5_core_create_mkey which then does
*mkey = (u32)mlx5_mkey_variant(*mkey) | mlx5_idx_to_mkey(mkey_index);
But isn't mlx5_mkey_variant(*mkey) just MLX5_GET(mkc, in, mkey_7_0)
and we can get rid of this confusing sequence?
> +
> +static void set_mkey_fields(void *mkc, struct mlx5_core_mkey *mkey)
> +{
> + mkey->iova = MLX5_GET64(mkc, mkc, start_addr);
> + mkey->size = MLX5_GET64(mkc, mkc, len);
> + mkey->pd = MLX5_GET(mkc, mkc, pd);
> + init_waitqueue_head(&mkey->wait);
> }
Why isn't this called through the create_mkey_callback() path? I think
evey mkey should always have a valid waitqueue
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists