> > #ifdef NES_NAPI > > Is #ifdef napi sprinkled throughout the code common for most drivers? Is > there > a better way to handle this? (Is this OFED only for backports, or for > upstream?)
Is there any reason why we want the upstream kernel to have both NAPI and non-NAPI support? If so, then this should probably be settable through Kconfig rather than having to edit the Makefile to change the NES_NAPI define. However, what almost always seems to happen is that no one uses the non-default code and it ends up bitrotting to the point of not compiling. So I would strongly suggest just having the NAPI code and getting rid of the NES_NAPI tests entirely. Is there any reason not to do that? - R. _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
