Re: [PATCH for-next v2] RDMA/rxe: Split MEM into MR and MW

From: Bob Pearson <rpearsonhpe@gmail.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: zyjzyj2000@gmail.com, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org,
	Bob Pearson <rpearson@hpe.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next v2] RDMA/rxe: Split MEM into MR and MW
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2021 14:00:37 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d008b9f1-ba94-725b-2753-d586a4e400bb@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210330201245.GA1447467@nvidia.com>

On 3/30/21 3:12 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 04:24:26PM -0500, Bob Pearson wrote:
>> In the original rxe implementation it was intended to use a common
>> object to represent MRs and MWs but they are different enough to
>> separate these into two objects.
>>
>> This allows replacing the mem name with mr for MRs which is more
>> consistent with the style for the other objects and less likely
>> to be confusing. This is a long patch that mostly changes mem to
>> mr where it makes sense and adds a new rxe_mw struct.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bob Pearson <rpearson@hpe.com>
>> Acked-by: Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> v2:
>>  v1 of this patch included some fields in the new rxe_mw struct
>>  which were not yet needed. They are removed in v2.
>>  This patch includes changes needed to address the fact that
>>  the ib_mw struct is now being allocated in rdma/core.
> 
> Applied to for-next
> 
> I touched it with clang-format first though, lots of little whitespace
> issues
> 
> Thanks,
> Jason
> 

When you apply to for-next where does it go? Until it shows up somewhere
I need to apply the patch but since you changed it I don't know what it
ended up as. If I knew which tree contained the patch I could figure it out.

Thanks,

Bob