On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 10:31:17PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 03:49:19PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:55:53PM +0800, Lijun Ou wrote: > > > When the user submits more than 32 work request to a srq queue > > > at a time, it needs to find the corresponding number of entries > > > in the bitmap in the idx queue. However, the original lookup > > > function named ffs only processes 32 bits of the array element, > > > When the number of srq wqe issued exceeds 32, the ffs will only > > > process the lower 32 bits of the elements, it will not be able > > > to get the correct wqe index for srq wqe. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Xi Wang <wangxi11@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Lijun Ou <oulijun@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > V1->V2: > > > 1. Use bitmap function instead of __ffs64() > > > drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_device.h | 2 +- > > > drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 29 +++++++++++++---------------- > > > drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_srq.c | 15 +++------------ > > > 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) > > > > Applied to for-next, thanks > > Jason, > > I don't want to be a party buster, but it is hard to believe that > this part of their patch is correct. > > + if (unlikely(bitmap_full(idx_que->bitmap, size))) > + bitmap_zero(idx_que->bitmap, size); > > They simply "dropping" all indexes. It is what the logic did before.. No idea what this algorithm is supposed to be Jason
