On 27-Feb-19 10:36, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 10:31:29AM +0200, Gal Pressman wrote:
>> On 26-Feb-19 21:32, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 05:33:10PM +0200, Gal Pressman wrote:
>>>> Add the EFA common commands implementation.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Gal Pressman <galpress@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>
> <...>
>
>>>> + err = efa_com_cmd_exec(aq,
>>>> + (struct efa_admin_aq_entry *)&create_qp_cmd,
>>>> + sizeof(create_qp_cmd),
>>>> + (struct efa_admin_acq_entry *)&cmd_completion,
>>>> + sizeof(cmd_completion));
>>>> + if (unlikely(err)) {
>>>
>>> There is no need to add likely/unlikely not in data path.
>>
>> Doesn't hurt though, right?
>
> Right, if readability is not important, it won't hurt.
Actually, I find likely/unlikely easier to read as it helps you identify the
main flows.
In this case the main flow is clear, but I wouldn't say that it hurts readability.
