lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Mar]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] RDMA/core: reduce IB_POLL_BATCH constant
From
Date


On 2/28/2018 8:55 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-02-28 at 11:50 +0200, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
>>
>> On 2/28/2018 2:21 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>>> On 02/27/18 14:15, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
>>>> -static int __ib_process_cq(struct ib_cq *cq, int budget, struct ib_wc
>>>> *poll_wc)
>>>> +static int __ib_process_cq(struct ib_cq *cq, int budget, struct ib_wc
>>>> *poll_wc,
>>>> + int batch)
>>>> {
>>>> - int i, n, completed = 0;
>>>> - struct ib_wc *wcs = poll_wc ? : cq->wc;
>>>> + int i, n, ib_poll_batch, completed = 0;
>>>> + struct ib_wc *wcs;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (poll_wc) {
>>>> + wcs = poll_wc;
>>>> + ib_poll_batch = batch;
>>>> + } else {
>>>> + wcs = cq->wc;
>>>> + ib_poll_batch = IB_POLL_BATCH;
>>>> + }
>>>
>>> Since this code has to be touched I think that we can use this
>>> opportunity to get rid of the "poll_wc ? : cq->wc" conditional and
>>> instead use what the caller passes. That will require to update all
>>> __ib_process_cq(..., ..., NULL) calls. I also propose to let the caller
>>> pass ib_poll_batch instead of figuring it out in this function.
>>> Otherwise the approach of this patch looks fine to me.
>>
>> Thanks Bart.
>> I'll make these changes and submit.
>
> That sounds reasonable to me too, thanks for reworking and resubmitting.
>

Sure, NP.
We've run NVMe-oF and SRP with the new patch.
I'll send it through Mellanox maintainers pull request.

Thanks for reporting and reviewing.

-Max.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-03-01 10:37    [W:0.137 / U:0.076 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site