On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 10:46:47AM +0800, Mark Zhang wrote:
> On 5/26/2021 4:00 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:22:12AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > @@ -2139,6 +2197,8 @@ static int cm_req_handler(struct cm_work *work)
> > > sa_path_set_dmac(&work->path[0],
> > > cm_id_priv->av.ah_attr.roce.dmac);
> > > work->path[0].hop_limit = grh->hop_limit;
> > > +
> > > + cm_destroy_av(&cm_id_priv->av);
> > > ret = cm_init_av_by_path(&work->path[0], gid_attr, &cm_id_priv->av);
> > > if (ret) {
> > > int err;
> >
> > Why add cm_destroy_av() here? The cm_id_priv was freshly created at
> > the top of this function and hasn't left the stack frame yet?
> >
> Because it was initialized by cm_init_av_for_response() previously, so
> destroy it here as cm_init_av_by_path() will re-initialize it.
Oh.. ouch, I once tried to re-order this so it wasn't doing such crazy
stuff, but it was too hard.
Please just add a comment the destroy is for the
cm_init_av_for_response
Jason
