On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 7:35 PM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 08:07:44AM +0200, Jack Wang wrote:
> > Hi Jason, hi Doug,
> >
> > Please consider to include following changes to upstream.
> >
> > This patchset fix a regression since b38041d50add ("RDMA/rtrs: Do not signal for heatbeat").
> >
> > In commit b38041d50add, the signal flag is droped to fix the send queue full
> > logic, but introduced a worse bug the send queue overflow on both clt and srv
> > by heartbeat, sorry.
> >
> > The patchset is orgnized as:
> > - patch1 debug patch.
> > - patch2 preparation.
> > - patch3 signal both IO and heartbeat.
> > - patch4 cleanup.
> > - patch5 cleanup
> > - patch6 move sq_wr_avail to account send queue full correctly.
> >
> > The patches are created base v5.14-rc1.
> >
> > Since v1:
> > * rebased to latest v5.14-rc1, target rc instread of for-next.
> >
> > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rdma/20210629065321.12600-1-jinpu.wang@xxxxxxxxx/T/#t
> >
> > Jack Wang (6):
> > RDMA/rtrs: Add error messages for failed operations.
> > RDMA/rtrs: move wr_cnt from rtrs_srv_con to rtrs_con
> > RDMA/rtrs: Enable the same selective signal for heartbeat and IO
> > RDMA/rtrs: Make rtrs_post_rdma_write_imm_empty static
> > RDMA/rtrs: Remove unused flags parameter
> > RDMA/rtrs: Move sq_wr_avail to rtrs_con
>
> This is not really structured well enough for a -rc patch. There
> should be no unncessary changes and each patch should try to be self
> contained. Avoid "cleanup". Carefully describe what user visible
> defect each patch is fixing.
>
> If you really want it to be in -rc then it needs reorganizing,
> otherwise I can put it in -next
>
> Jason
Hi Jason,
Thanks for your suggestion, I think it would be ok to put them in for-next.
Regards!
