Displaying 9 results from an estimated 9 matches for "mlx4_en_get_cq".
Did you mean:
mlx4_en_get_cqe
2018 May 18
2
[RFC v4 3/5] virtio_ring: add packed ring support
...n mlx4_en_process_rx_cq():
>
> ```
> /* We assume a 1:1 mapping between CQEs and Rx descriptors, so Rx
> * descriptor offset can be deduced from the CQE index instead of
> * reading 'cqe->index' */
> index = cq->mcq.cons_index & ring->size_mask;
> cqe = mlx4_en_get_cqe(cq->buf, index, priv->cqe_size) + factor;
> ```
>
> It seems that although they have a completion
> queue, they are still using the ring in order.
I guess so (at least from the above bits). Git grep -i "out of order" in
drivers/net gives some hints. Looks like there...
2018 May 18
2
[RFC v4 3/5] virtio_ring: add packed ring support
...n mlx4_en_process_rx_cq():
>
> ```
> /* We assume a 1:1 mapping between CQEs and Rx descriptors, so Rx
> * descriptor offset can be deduced from the CQE index instead of
> * reading 'cqe->index' */
> index = cq->mcq.cons_index & ring->size_mask;
> cqe = mlx4_en_get_cqe(cq->buf, index, priv->cqe_size) + factor;
> ```
>
> It seems that although they have a completion
> queue, they are still using the ring in order.
I guess so (at least from the above bits). Git grep -i "out of order" in
drivers/net gives some hints. Looks like there...
2018 May 17
2
[RFC v4 3/5] virtio_ring: add packed ring support
On 2018?05?16? 22:33, Tiwei Bie wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 10:05:44PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> On 2018?05?16? 21:45, Tiwei Bie wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 08:51:43PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>> On 2018?05?16? 20:39, Tiwei Bie wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 07:50:16PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>>>> On
2018 May 17
2
[RFC v4 3/5] virtio_ring: add packed ring support
On 2018?05?16? 22:33, Tiwei Bie wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 10:05:44PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> On 2018?05?16? 21:45, Tiwei Bie wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 08:51:43PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>> On 2018?05?16? 20:39, Tiwei Bie wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 07:50:16PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>>>> On
2018 May 18
0
[RFC v4 3/5] virtio_ring: add packed ring support
...glance. And I found below
comments in mlx4_en_process_rx_cq():
```
/* We assume a 1:1 mapping between CQEs and Rx descriptors, so Rx
* descriptor offset can be deduced from the CQE index instead of
* reading 'cqe->index' */
index = cq->mcq.cons_index & ring->size_mask;
cqe = mlx4_en_get_cqe(cq->buf, index, priv->cqe_size) + factor;
```
It seems that although they have a completion
queue, they are still using the ring in order.
I guess maybe storage device may want OOO.
Best regards,
Tiwei Bie
>
> Thanks
>
> >
> > > Not for the patch, but it looks...
2018 May 19
2
[RFC v4 3/5] virtio_ring: add packed ring support
...gt;>> /* We assume a 1:1 mapping between CQEs and Rx descriptors, so Rx
>>> * descriptor offset can be deduced from the CQE index instead of
>>> * reading 'cqe->index' */
>>> index = cq->mcq.cons_index & ring->size_mask;
>>> cqe = mlx4_en_get_cqe(cq->buf, index, priv->cqe_size) + factor;
>>> ```
>>>
>>> It seems that although they have a completion
>>> queue, they are still using the ring in order.
>> I guess so (at least from the above bits). Git grep -i "out of order" in
>>...
2018 May 19
2
[RFC v4 3/5] virtio_ring: add packed ring support
...gt;>> /* We assume a 1:1 mapping between CQEs and Rx descriptors, so Rx
>>> * descriptor offset can be deduced from the CQE index instead of
>>> * reading 'cqe->index' */
>>> index = cq->mcq.cons_index & ring->size_mask;
>>> cqe = mlx4_en_get_cqe(cq->buf, index, priv->cqe_size) + factor;
>>> ```
>>>
>>> It seems that although they have a completion
>>> queue, they are still using the ring in order.
>> I guess so (at least from the above bits). Git grep -i "out of order" in
>>...
2018 May 18
0
[RFC v4 3/5] virtio_ring: add packed ring support
...> > ```
> > /* We assume a 1:1 mapping between CQEs and Rx descriptors, so Rx
> > * descriptor offset can be deduced from the CQE index instead of
> > * reading 'cqe->index' */
> > index = cq->mcq.cons_index & ring->size_mask;
> > cqe = mlx4_en_get_cqe(cq->buf, index, priv->cqe_size) + factor;
> > ```
> >
> > It seems that although they have a completion
> > queue, they are still using the ring in order.
>
> I guess so (at least from the above bits). Git grep -i "out of order" in
> drivers/net g...
2018 May 19
0
[RFC v4 3/5] virtio_ring: add packed ring support
...:1 mapping between CQEs and Rx descriptors, so Rx
> > > > * descriptor offset can be deduced from the CQE index instead of
> > > > * reading 'cqe->index' */
> > > > index = cq->mcq.cons_index & ring->size_mask;
> > > > cqe = mlx4_en_get_cqe(cq->buf, index, priv->cqe_size) + factor;
> > > > ```
> > > >
> > > > It seems that although they have a completion
> > > > queue, they are still using the ring in order.
> > > I guess so (at least from the above bits). Git grep -i &q...