On 4/18/2017 7:43 AM, Nélio Laranjeiro wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 10:46:51AM -0700, Yongseok Koh wrote:
>> Current implementation is error-prone if the max inline size
>> (txq->max_inilne) is decoupled from txq->inline_en and becomes zero. If it
>> becomes zero, HW can crash due to WQ overflo
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 10:46:51AM -0700, Yongseok Koh wrote:
> Current implementation is error-prone if the max inline size
> (txq->max_inilne) is decoupled from txq->inline_en and becomes zero. If it
> becomes zero, HW can crash due to WQ overflow.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yongseok Koh
> Acked-by: Sh
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 08:51:39AM +0200, Nélio Laranjeiro wrote:
> Hi Yongseok,
>
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 10:46:51AM -0700, Yongseok Koh wrote:
> > Current implementation is error-prone if the max inline size
> > (txq->max_inilne) is decoupled from txq->inline_en and becomes zero. If it
> > bec
Hi Yongseok,
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 10:46:51AM -0700, Yongseok Koh wrote:
> Current implementation is error-prone if the max inline size
> (txq->max_inilne) is decoupled from txq->inline_en and becomes zero. If it
> becomes zero, HW can crash due to WQ overflow.
By reading this log, it seems mor
Current implementation is error-prone if the max inline size
(txq->max_inilne) is decoupled from txq->inline_en and becomes zero. If it
becomes zero, HW can crash due to WQ overflow.
Signed-off-by: Yongseok Koh
Acked-by: Shahaf Shuler
---
drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c | 12 +++-
1 file c
5 matches
Mail list logo