Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] RDMA/core: reduce IB_POLL_BATCH constant | From | Max Gurtovoy <> | Date | Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:36:50 +0200 |
| |
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.
| |