Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bige...@linutronix.de> writes:
> On 2024-06-12 12:49:21 [-0700], Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
>> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c
>> > b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c
>> > index 305e05294a26..e666739dfac7 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c
>> > @@ -5811,11 +5815,23 @@ static void igc_watchdog_task(struct work_struct
>> > *work)
>> > if (adapter->flags & IGC_FLAG_HAS_MSIX) {
>> > u32 eics = 0;
>> >
>> > - for (i = 0; i < adapter->num_q_vectors; i++)
>> > - eics |= adapter->q_vector[i]->eims_value;
>> > - wr32(IGC_EICS, eics);
>> > + for (i = 0; i < adapter->num_q_vectors; i++) {
>> > + struct igc_ring *rx_ring = adapter->rx_ring[i];
>> > +
>> > + if (test_bit(IGC_RING_FLAG_RX_ALLOC_FAILED,
>> > &rx_ring->flags)) {
>>
>> Minor and optional: I guess you can replace test_bit() -> clear_bit()
>> with __test_and_clear_bit() here and below.
>
> That are two steps, first test+clear is merged into one and then __ is
> added. The former is doable but it will always lead to a write operation
> while in the common case the flag isn't set so it will be skipped.
> Adding the __ leads to an unlocked operation and I don't see how this is
> synchronized against the other writes. In fact, nobody else is doing it.
>
I just took a look at the available operations, and thought that this
one could save a few lines of code. But didn't think too deeply about
that. Thanks.
Cheers,
--
Vinicius
