Re: [PATCH rdma-next v3 0/5] Cleanup restrack code

From: Jason Gunthorpe
Date: Tue Sep 22 2020 - 19:20:21 EST

On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:11:01PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Changelog:
> v3:
> * Removed the mlx4 SR-IOV patch in favour of more robust fix that not needed in
> this series.
> * Cut the eroginal series to already reviewed and standalone patches.
> v2:
> * Added new patch to fix mlx4 failure on SR-IOV, it didn't have port set.
> * Changed "RDMA/cma: Delete from restrack DB after successful destroy" patch.
> v1:
> * Fixed rebase error, deleted second assignment of qp_type.
> * Rebased code on latests rdma-next, the changes in cma.c caused to change
> in patch "RDMA/cma: Delete from restrack DB after successful destroy".
> * Dropped patch of port assignment, it is already done as part of this
> series.
> * I didn't add @calller description, regular users should not use _named() funciton.
> *
> v0:
> Leon Romanovsky (5):
> RDMA/cma: Delete from restrack DB after successful destroy
> RDMA/mlx5: Don't call to restrack recursively
> RDMA/restrack: Count references to the verbs objects
> RDMA/restrack: Simplify restrack tracking in kernel flows
> RDMA/restrack: Improve readability in task name management

Applied to for-next, thanks