lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Sep]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH rdma-next v3 0/5] Cleanup restrack code
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:11:01PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
>
> Changelog:
> v3:
> * Removed the mlx4 SR-IOV patch in favour of more robust fix that not needed in
> this series.
> * Cut the eroginal series to already reviewed and standalone patches.
> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rdma/20200907122156.478360-1-leon@kernel.org/
> * Added new patch to fix mlx4 failure on SR-IOV, it didn't have port set.
> * Changed "RDMA/cma: Delete from restrack DB after successful destroy" patch.
> v1:
> * Fixed rebase error, deleted second assignment of qp_type.
> * Rebased code on latests rdma-next, the changes in cma.c caused to change
> in patch "RDMA/cma: Delete from restrack DB after successful destroy".
> * Dropped patch of port assignment, it is already done as part of this
> series.
> * I didn't add @calller description, regular users should not use _named() funciton.
> * https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200830101436.108487-1-leon@kernel.org
> v0: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200824104415.1090901-1-leon@kernel.org
>
>
> Leon Romanovsky (5):
> RDMA/cma: Delete from restrack DB after successful destroy
> RDMA/mlx5: Don't call to restrack recursively
> RDMA/restrack: Count references to the verbs objects
> RDMA/restrack: Simplify restrack tracking in kernel flows
> RDMA/restrack: Improve readability in task name management

Applied to for-next, thanks

Jason

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-09-23 01:20    [W:0.025 / U:5.408 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site