Re: [PATCH net-next v5 00/10] optimize the parallelism of SMC-R connections

["D. Wythe" <alibuda@linux.alibaba.com>]

On 11/23/22 11:54 PM, D.Wythe wrote:
> From: "D.Wythe" <alibuda@linux.alibaba.com>
> 
> This patch set attempts to optimize the parallelism of SMC-R connections,
> mainly to reduce unnecessary blocking on locks, and to fix exceptions that
> occur after thoses optimization.
> 

> D. Wythe (10):
>    net/smc: Fix potential panic dues to unprotected
>      smc_llc_srv_add_link()
>    net/smc: fix application data exception
>    net/smc: fix SMC_CLC_DECL_ERR_REGRMB without smc_server_lgr_pending
>    net/smc: remove locks smc_client_lgr_pending and
>      smc_server_lgr_pending
>    net/smc: allow confirm/delete rkey response deliver multiplex
>    net/smc: make SMC_LLC_FLOW_RKEY run concurrently
>    net/smc: llc_conf_mutex refactor, replace it with rw_semaphore
>    net/smc: use read semaphores to reduce unnecessary blocking in
>      smc_buf_create() & smcr_buf_unuse()
>    net/smc: reduce unnecessary blocking in smcr_lgr_reg_rmbs()
>    net/smc: replace mutex rmbs_lock and sndbufs_lock with rw_semaphore
> 
>   net/smc/af_smc.c   |  74 ++++----
>   net/smc/smc_core.c | 541 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>   net/smc/smc_core.h |  53 +++++-
>   net/smc/smc_llc.c  | 285 ++++++++++++++++++++--------
>   net/smc/smc_llc.h  |   6 +
>   net/smc/smc_wr.c   |  10 -
>   net/smc/smc_wr.h   |  10 +
>   7 files changed, 801 insertions(+), 178 deletions(-)
> 

Hi Jan and Wenjia,

I'm wondering whether the bug fix patches need to be put together in this series. I'm considering
sending these bug fix patches separately now, which may be better, in case that our patch
might have other problems. These bug fix patches are mainly independent, even without my other
patches, they may be triggered theoretically.

Of course, these bug fix patches may need to ahead before the other PATCH,
otherwise the probability of the problems they fixed may be amplified in
an intermediate version.

What do you think?

Best Wishes.
D. Wythe