The prefix tag and subject imply that it is a bugfix. I think, first, it should be a new feature with net-next tag. Also please use net/smc as prefix. Thanks, Tony Lu On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 07:51:00AM -0800, Yury Norov wrote: > The function opencodes find_and_set_bit() with a for_each() loop. Fix > it, and make the whole function a simple almost one-liner. > > Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > net/smc/smc_wr.c | 10 +++------- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/smc/smc_wr.c b/net/smc/smc_wr.c > index 0021065a600a..b6f0cfc52788 100644 > --- a/net/smc/smc_wr.c > +++ b/net/smc/smc_wr.c > @@ -170,15 +170,11 @@ void smc_wr_tx_cq_handler(struct ib_cq *ib_cq, void *cq_context) > > static inline int smc_wr_tx_get_free_slot_index(struct smc_link *link, u32 *idx) > { > - *idx = link->wr_tx_cnt; > if (!smc_link_sendable(link)) > return -ENOLINK; > - for_each_clear_bit(*idx, link->wr_tx_mask, link->wr_tx_cnt) { > - if (!test_and_set_bit(*idx, link->wr_tx_mask)) > - return 0; > - } > - *idx = link->wr_tx_cnt; > - return -EBUSY; > + > + *idx = find_and_set_bit(link->wr_tx_mask, link->wr_tx_cnt); > + return *idx < link->wr_tx_cnt ? 0 : -EBUSY; > } > > /** > -- > 2.39.2