> On Jan 11, 2023, at 8:53 AM, Quinn Tran <qutran@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> +void __qla_adjust_buf(struct qla_qpair *qp)
> +{
> + u32 trim;
> +
> + qp->buf_pool.take_snapshot = 0;
> + qp->buf_pool.prev_max = qp->buf_pool.max_used;
> + qp->buf_pool.max_used = qp->buf_pool.num_active;
> +
> + if (qp->buf_pool.prev_max > qp->buf_pool.max_used &&
>
> You are assigning qp->buf_pool.prev_max with the value from qp->buf_pool.max_used a couple of lines above to max_used ... . This check looks incorrect because now the value for buf_pool.prev_max will be the same as buf_pool.max_used.
>
> Am I missing something?
>
> QT: Thanks for the review. The 'qp->buf_pool.max_used = qp->buf_pool.num_active;' line seems to be overlooked. It changes max_used, where prev_max is not the same as max_used.
>
Indeed. Thanks for the clarification. Rest of the patch looks good.
Reviewed-by: Himanshu Madhani <himanshu.madhani@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
Himanshu Madhani Oracle Linux Engineering
