RE: [openib-general] [PATCH v2 1/7] AMSO1100 Low Level Driver.
- From: Steve Wise <swise@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:58:29 -0500
Now that I've looked more into this, I'm not sure there's a
simple way for the IWCM to copy the pdata on the upcall.
Currently, the IWCM's event upcall, cm_event_handler(),
simply queues the work for processing on a workqueue thread.
So there's no per-event logic at all there.
Lemme think on this more. Stay tuned.
Either way, the amso driver has a memory leak...
Having the IWCM copy the pdata during the upcall also leaves
the greatest flexibility for the driver on how/where the pdata
is captured. The IWCM has to deal with user-mode, indefinite
delays waiting for a response and user-mode processes that die
while holding a connection request. So it makes sense for that
layer to do the allocating and copying.
I've already coded and test this. The IWCM will copy the pdata...
Steve.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- RE: [openib-general] [PATCH v2 1/7] AMSO1100 Low Level Driver.
- From: Caitlin Bestler
- RE: [openib-general] [PATCH v2 1/7] AMSO1100 Low Level Driver.
- Prev by Date: Re: [RFC] CPU controllers?
- Next by Date: Re: [RFC PATCH -rt] Priority preemption latency
- Previous by thread: RE: [openib-general] [PATCH v2 1/7] AMSO1100 Low Level Driver.
- Next by thread: [RFC] CPU controllers?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|