On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 01:16:48PM -0500, Bob Pearson wrote:
> On 7/31/23 13:11, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 03:50:16PM -0500, Bob Pearson wrote:
> >> @@ -175,16 +175,17 @@ static void rxe_elem_release(struct kref *kref)
> >> {
> >> struct rxe_pool_elem *elem = container_of(kref, typeof(*elem), ref_cnt);
> >>
> >> - complete(&elem->complete);
> >> + complete_all(&elem->complete);
> >> }
> >>
> >> -int __rxe_cleanup(struct rxe_pool_elem *elem, bool sleepable)
> >> +void __rxe_cleanup(struct rxe_pool_elem *elem, bool sleepable)
> >> {
> >
> > You should definately put this one change in its own patch doing just
> > that.
> >
> > Jason
>
> Please explain a little more.
I mean just remove the function return in one patch, these functions
are not supposed to fail anyhow.
> I only found this change because the change in rxe_complete to
> repeat the wait_for_completion call didn't work. This seemed to fix
> it but the man page and comments didn't explain complete_all very
> well.
I didn't mean the complete_all hunk, I ment the __rxe_cleanup hunk :)
Jason
