On 03/01/2016 03:27 PM, Jubin John wrote: >>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rdma/hfi1/sdma.c >>> b/drivers/staging/rdma/hfi1/sdma.c >>> index 1d38be5..cb66bd0 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/staging/rdma/hfi1/sdma.c >>> +++ b/drivers/staging/rdma/hfi1/sdma.c >>> @@ -1061,7 +1061,6 @@ int sdma_init(struct hfi1_devdata *dd, u8 port) >>> sde->desc_avail = sdma_descq_freecnt(sde); >>> sde->sdma_shift = ilog2(descq_cnt); >>> sde->sdma_mask = (1 << sde->sdma_shift) - 1; >>> - sde->descq_full_count = 0; >>> >>> /* Create a mask for all 3 chip interrupt sources */ >>> sde->imask = (u64)1 << (0*TXE_NUM_SDMA_ENGINES + this_idx) >>> @@ -1073,6 +1072,8 @@ int sdma_init(struct hfi1_devdata *dd, u8 port) >>> /* Create a mask specifically for sdma_progress */ >>> sde->progress_mask = >>> (u64)1 << (TXE_NUM_SDMA_ENGINES + this_idx); >>> + sde->int_mask = >>> + (u64)1 << (0 * TXE_NUM_SDMA_ENGINES + this_idx); >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> Why is that there? >> > > Hi Doug, > > The zero was intentionally added in an attempt to highlight that this > was for the first interrupt source, like we do in other places above this > where we have 1 * TXE_NUM_SDMA_ENGINES, 2 * TXE_NUM_SDMA_ENGINES etc. > The interrupt sources are separated by the number of SDMA engines > i.e TXE_NUM_SDMA_ENGINES. However, we agree that the code is not > consistent throughout. Would you like us to do a cleanup of this code > in a follow-on patch or rework this patch and resend the series? > > Jubin >
Thanks, the code is confusing to read, so a cleanup would be nice. Just
send me something I can squash into this patch is good enough.
--
Doug Ledford <dledf...@redhat.com>
GPG KeyID: 0E572FDD
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
