On Tue, 2018-11-06 at 22:02 +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 04:31:08PM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
> > On Wed, 2018-10-31 at 12:20 +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > From: Yishai Hadas <yishaih@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Adapt XRC SRQ to the latest HW specification with fixed definition
> > > around umem valid bits. The previous definition relied on a bit which
> > > was taken for other purposes in legacy FW.
> > >
> > > Fixes: bd37197554eb ("net/mlx5: Update mlx5_ifc with DEVX UID bits")
> > > Signed-off-by: Yishai Hadas <yishaih@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Reviewed-by: Artemy Kovalyov <artemyko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Hi Doug, Jason
> > >
> > > This commit fixes code sent in this merge window, so I'm not marking it
> > > with any rdma-rc/rdma-next. It will be better to be sent during this merge
> > > window if you have extra pull request to issue, or as a -rc material, if
> > > not.
> > >
> > > BTW, we didn't combine reserved fields, because our convention is to align such
> > > fields to 32 bits for better readability.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> >
> > This looks fine. Let me know when it's in the mlx5-next tree to pull.
>
> It needs to go to -rc...
>
> This needs a mlx5-rc branch for this I guess?
I don't think so. As long as it's the first commit in mlx5-next, and
mlx5-next is 4.20-rc1 based, then pulling this commit into the -rc tree
will only pull the single commit. Then when we pull into for-next for
the first time, we will get this in for-next too. That seems best to
me.
--
Doug Ledford <dledford@xxxxxxxxxx>
GPG KeyID: B826A3330E572FDD
Key fingerprint = AE6B 1BDA 122B 23B4 265B 1274 B826 A333 0E57 2FDD
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
