From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-173.mta0.migadu.com (out-173.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.173]) (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 A6E5C2C190 for ; Sat, 19 Apr 2025 06:44:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.173 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745045085; cv=none; b=ruJcYKKkoxuqcYXiR+KpeS+U7/fkMGyyYM27i4HuuZhMiv5TxQoNrReeDlXM6qSte+42NqFmuD6gyszf9UImfH+2EtmI3KUEA+Jol12hbF6XnDwnjK3FAwIwrYAYyIg8uQABD4yrBKwrGrW6O+ReLhKG7AMIGRi9oZKCNQZVo+Y= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745045085; c=relaxed/simple; bh=f/wUfOx93l3R/ve9eoN8A0lUZqgqMMvyIXEZA4V9Kik=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=hHJC+Y2fh2PpyOXzJVcnnNaUWQTCDU5d5kpoJ0g7VfnWg0W/EX1ZejFI6UMYphbg0tHELxV/3KXgmRSc4m7ZqD9U2yZsWtjcjuMqBApeivkLs5sVKJ0dPg50wt5yD6bZRPMuKvtnBEc48eosUJ4d8Jn8RLF/uhWnhs6dlEIMpYY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=jpWO06uP; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.173 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="jpWO06uP" Message-ID: <7ca8fd94-da46-40ad-8ced-31fe033ee100@linux.dev> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1745045079; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=A8BRY2zacbXxHIh4qRZFRRrjEw4oANmnG8Oe151M0EY=; b=jpWO06uPRYMJSoqh7zR7KHARG/+pqiE75E6TeMgLuT+dU8oQ2t6PF39qgYzf2/wLIwbdpF ACIVnC06GgiZKtenEsjHo+J0HkOud4Zz+ArxP5uKXc1Xct3L0ZjGn+HXFSMMNW/QXPJ7z4 ViLjTX6uevrQ3Qck1cb5mHaA0tphYaU= Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2025 08:44:23 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] RDMA/rxe: Remove unused rxe_run_task To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Cc: zyjzyj2000@gmail.com, jgg@ziepe.ca, leon@kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20250418165948.241433-1-linux@treblig.org> X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Zhu Yanjun In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT 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. Zhu Yanjun > >> Except the above, I am fine with this commit. > > Thanks! > >> Reviewed-by: Zhu Yanjun > > Dave >