From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932304AbWGDRGu (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 13:06:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932305AbWGDRGu (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 13:06:50 -0400 Received: from mxl145v68.mxlogic.net ([208.65.145.68]:31968 "EHLO p02c11o145.mxlogic.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932304AbWGDRGt (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 13:06:49 -0400 Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 19:52:34 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Zach Brown Cc: Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, openib-general@openib.org, Arjan van de Ven Subject: Re: [openib-general] [PATCH] mthca: initialize send and receive queue locks separately Message-ID: <20060704165234.GA5935@mellanox.co.il> Reply-To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" References: <44AA9999.3060308@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44AA9999.3060308@oracle.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Jul 2006 16:57:17.0546 (UTC) FILETIME=[E821A4A0:01C69F8A] X-Spam: [F=0.0100000000; S=0.010(2006062901)] X-MAIL-FROM: X-SOURCE-IP: [63.251.237.3] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Quoting r. Zach Brown : > Is that just a side-effect of > relying on mthca_wq_init() to reset the non-lock members? Yes. > If you're > concerned about microoptimization it seems like this could be avoided. This is off the fast path so I think Roland's idea was we should only care about code size. But might be worth thinking this over, anyway. Thanks! -- MST