[openib-general] [PATCH] ib_mad: Implement ib_free_recv_mad routine

[Hal Rosenstock]

On Wed, 2004-09-15 at 13:57, Sean Hefty wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 12:38:24 -0400
> Hal Rosenstock <halr at voltaire.com> wrote:
> 
> > ib_mad: Implement ib_free_recv_mad routine
> > ===================================================================
> > +void ib_free_recv_mad(struct ib_mad_recv_wc *mad_recv_wc)
> > +{
> > +	kfree(mad_recv_wc); /* RMPP !!! */
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(ib_free_recv_mad);
> > +
> >  static inline u8 convert_mgmt_class(u8 mgmt_class)
> >  {
> >  	/* Alias IB_MGMT_CLASS_SUBN_DIRECTED_ROUTE to 0 */
> > @@ -669,7 +679,6 @@
> >  static void ib_mad_recv_done_handler(struct ib_mad_port_private
> > *port_priv,
> >  				     struct ib_wc *wc)
> >  {
> > -	struct ib_mad_recv_wc recv_wc;
> >  	struct ib_mad_private *recv;
> >  	unsigned long flags;
> >  	u32 qp_num;
> > @@ -707,9 +716,9 @@
> >  			 PCI_DMA_FROMDEVICE);
> >  
> >  	/* Setup MAD receive work completion from "normal" work completion */
> > -	recv_wc.wc = wc;
> > -	recv_wc.mad_len = sizeof(struct ib_mad); /* Should this be based on
> > wc->byte_len ? Also, RMPP !!! */
> > -	recv_wc.recv_buf = &recv->header.recv_buf;
> > +	recv->header.recv_wc.wc = wc;
> > +	recv->header.recv_wc.mad_len = sizeof(struct ib_mad); /* Should this
> > be based on wc->byte_len ? Also, RMPP !!! */
> > +	recv->header.recv_wc.recv_buf = &recv->header.recv_buf;
> >  
> 
> Would it make more sense for ib_mad_recv_wc to have an embedded 
> recv_buf, rather than a a pointer to a recv_buf?  
> Seems like a minor optimization/simplification.

I think that optimization would only work short term. Once RMPP is
supported, it doesn't so I would leave the API as is. 

-- Hal