mbox series

[for-rc,0/4] Patches for 5.5 rc

Message ID 20191219211609.58387.86077.stgit@awfm-01.aw.intel.com (mailing list archive)
Headers show
Series Patches for 5.5 rc | expand

Message

Dennis Dalessandro Dec. 19, 2019, 9:19 p.m. UTC
The first two patches I wouldn't ordinarily have sent for -rc but I noticed we
did this in the previous -rc post, add an API because we use it in the next fix.
That's what the first two patches here do. It's understandable if you are
skeptical that those are OK for -rc and in which case you can drop and we can
send for next.

---

Kaike Wan (1):
      IB/hfi1: Don't cancel unused work item

Michael J. Ruhl (1):
      IB/hfi1: List all receive contexts from debugfs

Mike Marciniszyn (2):
      IB/hfi1: Add accessor API routines to access context members
      IB/rdmavt: Correct comments in rdmavt_qp.h header


 drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/chip.c        |   27 ++----
 drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/common.h      |    3 +
 drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/debugfs.c     |    2 
 drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/driver.c      |   86 +++++++++-----------
 drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/file_ops.c    |   12 +--
 drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/hfi.h         |  129 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/init.c        |    6 +
 drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/iowait.c      |    4 +
 drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/trace_ctxts.h |    2 
 drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/trace_rx.h    |   13 +--
 drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/vnic_main.c   |    2 
 drivers/infiniband/sw/rdmavt/rc.c        |    9 ++
 include/rdma/rdmavt_qp.h                 |   22 -----
 13 files changed, 205 insertions(+), 112 deletions(-)

--
-Denny

Comments

Jason Gunthorpe Dec. 20, 2019, 1:47 p.m. UTC | #1
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 04:19:15PM -0500, Dennis Dalessandro wrote:
> The first two patches I wouldn't ordinarily have sent for -rc but I noticed we
> did this in the previous -rc post, add an API because we use it in the next fix.
> That's what the first two patches here do. It's understandable if you are
> skeptical that those are OK for -rc and in which case you can drop and we can
> send for next.

The only one that looks RC worthy to me is:

> Kaike Wan (1):
>       IB/hfi1: Don't cancel unused work item
> 

> Mike Marciniszyn (2):
>       IB/hfi1: Add accessor API routines to access context members
>       IB/rdmavt: Correct comments in rdmavt_qp.h header

How is correcting comments a needed fix?

Jason
Jason Gunthorpe Jan. 3, 2020, 8:47 p.m. UTC | #2
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 04:19:15PM -0500, Dennis Dalessandro wrote:
> The first two patches I wouldn't ordinarily have sent for -rc but I noticed we
> did this in the previous -rc post, add an API because we use it in the next fix.
> That's what the first two patches here do. It's understandable if you are
> skeptical that those are OK for -rc and in which case you can drop and we can
> send for next.
> 
> 
> Kaike Wan (1):
>       IB/hfi1: Don't cancel unused work item

As I said before, I took this one to -rc

> Michael J. Ruhl (1):
>       IB/hfi1: List all receive contexts from debugfs

This version of the patch now applies cleanly, so please disregard my
earlier email

> Mike Marciniszyn (2):
>       IB/hfi1: Add accessor API routines to access context members
>       IB/rdmavt: Correct comments in rdmavt_qp.h header

These three are applied to -next

Thanks,
Jason