From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C008C4332F for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2022 05:55:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229463AbiKXFzo (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Nov 2022 00:55:44 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39244 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229468AbiKXFzn (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Nov 2022 00:55:43 -0500 Received: from out30-54.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-54.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.54]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA0F91F60C; Wed, 23 Nov 2022 21:55:41 -0800 (PST) X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R171e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=ay29a033018046050;MF=alibuda@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=8;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0VVZddDw_1669269338; Received: from 30.221.149.133(mailfrom:alibuda@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0VVZddDw_1669269338) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com; Thu, 24 Nov 2022 13:55:39 +0800 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2022 13:55:37 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.13.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 00/10] optimize the parallelism of SMC-R connections Content-Language: en-US From: "D. Wythe" To: kgraul@linux.ibm.com, wenjia@linux.ibm.com, jaka@linux.ibm.com Cc: kuba@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org References: <1669218890-115854-1-git-send-email-alibuda@linux.alibaba.com> In-Reply-To: <1669218890-115854-1-git-send-email-alibuda@linux.alibaba.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org On 11/23/22 11:54 PM, D.Wythe wrote: > From: "D.Wythe" > > 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