On Sun, 2019-01-27 at 07:51 +0000, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 10:08:00AM -0800, Saeed Mahameed wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 4:30 AM Leon Romanovsky < > > leonro@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 04:33:09PM -0800, Saeed Mahameed wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > This series includes updates to mlx5-next shared branch. > > > > > > > > 1) from Jason, improve mlx5_cmd_exec_cb async API to be safer > > > > 2) from Maxim Mikityanskiy, cleanups for mlx5_write64 doorbell > > > > API > > > > 3) from Michael Guralnik, Add pci AtomicOps request > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Saeed. > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Jason Gunthorpe (1): > > > > net/mlx5: Make mlx5_cmd_exec_cb() a safe API > > > > > > > > Michael Guralnik (1): > > > > net/mlx5: Add pci AtomicOps request > > > > > > Those two were applied to mlx5-next branch. > > > > > > ce4eee5340a9 (mlx5-next) net/mlx5: Add pci AtomicOps request > > > e355477ed9e4 net/mlx5: Make mlx5_cmd_exec_cb() a safe API > > > > > > > Maxim Mikityanskiy (2): > > > > net/mlx5: Remove unused MLX5_*_DOORBELL_LOCK macros > > > > net/mlx5: Remove spinlock support from mlx5_write64 > > > > > > Those two needs extra work, > > > > What extra work ? > > You got two comments for area you are touching: > 1. Replace _rww writes to something else. Not related to this cleanup patchset. > 2. Protect with spinlock 32-bits writes instead of ignoring it. Same as above, I already explained this. > > Both of those changes will touch the same 2-4 lines and there > is very little benefit in creating more than one-two patches > just for that. > Future work, as it needs verification and careful testing. Leon I would like to move on with those 2 small cleanup patches, no functionality change here, please confirm you are ok with them. Thanks, Saeed. > Thanks > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > -- > > > > 2.20.1 > > > >
