Re: [openib-general] [PATCH] mthca: initialize send and receive queue locks separately

> This moves code out of a common function and so results in code duplication
> and has memory cost.

Of course.  I don't care which trade-offs you prefer to maintain as long
as the driver stops yelling at me as the machine boots.  That patch was
what Arjan suggested as the simplest.

Also, while looking at this I saw that the locks are being
re-initialized from mthca_modify_qp().  Is that just a side-effect of
relying on mthca_wq_init() to reset the non-lock members?  If you're
concerned about microoptimization it seems like this could be avoided.

- z
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [openib-general] [PATCH] mthca: initialize send and receive queue locks separately
  - From: Roland Dreier <[email protected]>
- Re: [openib-general] [PATCH] mthca: initialize send and receive queue locks separately
  - From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <[email protected]>

References:
- [PATCH] mthca: initialize send and receive queue locks separately
  - From: Zach Brown <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] mthca: initialize send and receive queue locks separately
  - From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [Patch][RFC] Disabling per-tgid stats on task exit in taskstats
Next by Date: Re: [RFC 0/8] Reduce MAX_NR_ZONES and remove useless zones.
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] lockdep: don't pull in includes when lockdep disabled
Next by thread: Re: [openib-general] [PATCH] mthca: initialize send and receive queue locks separately
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Kernel Newbies] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Photo] [Stuff] [Gimp] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Video 4 Linux] [Linux for the blind] [Linux Resources]