On 4/4/21 2:41 AM, Mark Bloch wrote: > On 4/3/21 10:00 PM, Bob Pearson wrote: >> On 3/30/21 3:12 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >>> On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 04:24:26PM -0500, Bob Pearson wrote: >>>> In the original rxe implementation it was intended to use a common >>>> object to represent MRs and MWs but they are different enough to >>>> separate these into two objects. >>>> >>>> This allows replacing the mem name with mr for MRs which is more >>>> consistent with the style for the other objects and less likely >>>> to be confusing. This is a long patch that mostly changes mem to >>>> mr where it makes sense and adds a new rxe_mw struct. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Bob Pearson <rpearson@xxxxxxx> >>>> Acked-by: Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@xxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> v2: >>>> v1 of this patch included some fields in the new rxe_mw struct >>>> which were not yet needed. They are removed in v2. >>>> This patch includes changes needed to address the fact that >>>> the ib_mw struct is now being allocated in rdma/core. >>> >>> Applied to for-next >>> >>> I touched it with clang-format first though, lots of little whitespace >>> issues >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Jason >>> >> >> When you apply to for-next where does it go? Until it shows up somewhere >> I need to apply the patch but since you changed it I don't know what it >> ended up as. If I knew which tree contained the patch I could figure it out. >> >> Thanks, > > You should see it here: wip/jgg-for-next > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rdma/rdma.git/log/?h=wip/jgg-for-next > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rdma/rdma.git/commit/?h=wip/jgg-for-next&id=364e282c4fe7e24a5f32cd6e93e1056c6a6e3d31 > > Mark > >> >> Bob >> > Thanks.
