From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] rdma: split struct ib_send_wr Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 19:47:20 +0200 Message-ID: <20150804174720.GA22895@lst.de> References: <1438672609-12599-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <55C0F108.4090003@dev.mellanox.co.il> <20150804172328.GA22468@lst.de> <55C0F9FA.6060105@dev.mellanox.co.il> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55C0F9FA.6060105-LDSdmyG8hGV8YrgS2mwiifqBs+8SCbDb@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Sagi Grimberg Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 08:44:26PM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > I do agree that the size on the stack is less of an issue now. What > still can matter is handling each wr one by one vs. doing a collective > post. But if structured correctly you can still do that with on-stack WRs. > I can understand that. In the last patches I tried to simplify the flow > (I noticed that these aren't in your tree correct?). There always room > for cleanups... I'm trying to have a gradual progress towards getting it > to be simpler. I used Doug's to be rebased for 4.3 tree from yesterday or so. So whatever he merged is in. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html