From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx.treblig.org (mx.treblig.org [46.235.229.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3EA9647; Sat, 19 Apr 2025 13:28:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=46.235.229.95 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745069291; cv=none; b=erFzAkrcvAk6/tjLYi5jSREJZJMYq3F/SL92wQnT2LY4zAHl2siUyPcxmTkzTyiQjt2CAJfgFuj+AbYgKuqmC1Od6UIE9D6JMUmB/wfFPIowKnhzWN7ZTL6zCiTXyTkQZJTg78/gOOV4WCAKdiyA3YTZjzXvnFc08CrQtQ9m2qs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745069291; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9+MUCOkMNe7ZGVgFobC7L30f9g9LsTmflVbc/x2KK0Y=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=EJGMt95heb8z9TDTfBUvuh7EiGS9qpWd0w3QfOrWTkvSRdyBMJMObqVoGmoAC3n3izUu8hTIybjbGYWNW59x4lnk8C+z6FgGi/xiczGr00Ms1yatnO1d6JysAUhB3qd8cwOHYt1XwgFCmERDEExO2Ou2MRzjS6FxppwqXBnvwg0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=treblig.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=treblig.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=treblig.org header.i=@treblig.org header.b=E7RzjPvu; arc=none smtp.client-ip=46.235.229.95 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=treblig.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=treblig.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=treblig.org header.i=@treblig.org header.b="E7RzjPvu" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=treblig.org ; s=bytemarkmx; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Subject:From:Date:From :Subject; bh=sk3WbHpmlLdAK/d30vMNt7YLt8OIuLlvE8a6+eKsOuc=; b=E7RzjPvuH7p5UObn Onai09uGmjku+kCixEEtoGp0LoAr9+VGZ0dQDkdssdfFao2XsM0gWJuv7mXLdu4kgyWOEdenKa7jL KCh9xbwj9MRIZmY5tTQnfYONspaHmlUypOc8SCZkPlEIoWNw/sBHr//BBZH2EUh5SCT1XoBJ533qj WQIGSmeXRH9Yw2uwncJW8p5qFnKX01mBl2ovZgdDDw+jPSk9fD/2QOx1AhLxsqg4i+xQ8I2v2hUMe I1nLgL6y911kBUGhuqTVu2SnqI/YtCW5fpcuckR4JWBrtBJUrE8IKB80obV8W8SSdq7ivwA8kuAel AwKl0F5Y54WXiqUwPg==; Received: from dg by mx.treblig.org with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1u68Eo-00CeU1-2z; Sat, 19 Apr 2025 13:28:06 +0000 Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2025 13:28:06 +0000 From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" To: Zhu Yanjun Cc: zyjzyj2000@gmail.com, jgg@ziepe.ca, leon@kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] RDMA/rxe: Remove unused rxe_run_task Message-ID: References: <20250418165948.241433-1-linux@treblig.org> <7ca8fd94-da46-40ad-8ced-31fe033ee100@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <7ca8fd94-da46-40ad-8ced-31fe033ee100@linux.dev> X-Chocolate: 70 percent or better cocoa solids preferably X-Operating-System: Linux/6.1.0-21-amd64 (x86_64) X-Uptime: 13:27:51 up 346 days, 41 min, 1 user, load average: 0.07, 0.02, 0.00 User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.12 (2023-09-09) * Zhu Yanjun (yanjun.zhu@linux.dev) wrote: > 在 2025/4/19 2:22, Dr. David Alan Gilbert 写道: > > > > Hi, > > > > > Thanks a lot. Please add the Fixes tags. > > > Fixes: 23bc06af547f ("RDMA/rxe: Don't call direct between tasks") > > > > Thanks for the review; I've tended to avoid the fixes tag because > > people use 'Fixes' to automatically pull in patches to stable or > > downstream kernels, and there is no need for them to do that for > > a cleanup patch. > > > > > And in the following comments, the function rxe_run_task is still mentioned. > > > " > > > 86 /* do_task is a wrapper for the three tasks (requester, > > > 87 * completer, responder) and calls them in a loop until > > > 88 * they return a non-zero value. It is called either > > > 89 * directly by rxe_run_task or indirectly if rxe_sched_task > > > 90 * schedules the task. They must call __reserve_if_idle to > > > 91 * move the task to busy before calling or scheduling. > > > 92 * The task can also be moved to drained or invalid > > > 93 * by calls to rxe_cleanup_task or rxe_disable_task. > > > 94 * In that case tasks which get here are not executed but > > > 95 * just flushed. The tasks are designed to look to see if > > > 96 * there is work to do and then do part of it before returning > > > 97 * here with a return value of zero until all the work > > > 98 * has been consumed then it returns a non-zero value. > > > 99 * The number of times the task can be run is limited by > > > 100 * max iterations so one task cannot hold the cpu forever. > > > 101 * If the limit is hit and work remains the task is rescheduled. > > > 102 */ > > > " > > > Not sure if you like to modify the above comments to remove rxe_run_task or > > > not. > > > > Would it be correct to just reword: > > > 88 * It is called either > > > 89 * directly by rxe_run_task or indirectly if rxe_sched_task > > > 90 * schedules the task. > > > > to: > > It is called indirectly when rxe_sched_task schedules the task. > > I am fine with it. Thanks a lot. Thanks, v2 sent. Dave > Zhu Yanjun > > > > > > Except the above, I am fine with this commit. > > > > Thanks! > > > > > Reviewed-by: Zhu Yanjun > > > > Dave > > > -- -----Open up your eyes, open up your mind, open up your code ------- / Dr. David Alan Gilbert | Running GNU/Linux | Happy \ \ dave @ treblig.org | | In Hex / \ _________________________|_____ http://www.treblig.org |_______/