On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 05:37:47PM +0200, Keller, Jacob E wrote: > > Am 24.04.25 um 13:32 schrieb Larysa Zaremba: > > > From: Pavan Kumar Linga <[email protected]> > > > > > > Support to initialize and configure controlq, Xn manager, > > > MMIO and reset APIs was introduced in libie. As part of it, > > > most of the existing controlq structures are renamed and > > > modified. Use those APIs in idpf and make all the necessary changes. > > > > > > Previously for the send and receive virtchnl messages, there > > > used to be a memcpy involved in controlq code to copy the buffer > > > info passed by the send function into the controlq specific > > > buffers. There was no restriction to use automatic memory > > > in that case. The new implementation in libie removed copying > > > of the send buffer info and introduced DMA mapping of the > > > send buffer itself. To accommodate it, use dynamic memory for > > > the send buffers. In case of receive, idpf receives a page pool > > > buffer allocated by the libie and care should be taken to > > > release it after use in the idpf. > > > > > > The changes are fairly trivial and localized, with a notable exception > > > being the consolidation of idpf_vc_xn_shutdown and idpf_deinit_dflt_mbx > > > under the latter name. This has some additional consequences that are > > > addressed in the following patches. > > > > (You could reflow the text above to have consistent line length.) > > > > I do see a few spots that don't look consistent. Its hard to say if this is > just due to the way longer words like the function names line up or not > without popping it into vim to double check...
It is quite funny how you answered this with a line that does not fit on my screen in mutt :D I admit, newlines are all over the place, probably as a consequence of editing this so many times in nano. I can reformat this, if it hurts people's eyes that much, though I do not consider this a problem if it fits the limit.
