Index | Thread | Search

From:
Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
Subject:
Re: The 6th batch of qwz commits
To:
Stefan Sperling <stsp@stsp.name>
Cc:
tech@openbsd.org
Date:
Thu, 01 Oct 2026 13:47:12 +0200

Download raw body.

Thread
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2026 13:43:35 +0200
> From: Stefan Sperling <stsp@stsp.name>
> 
> (moved to tech@ from ports@)
> 
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2026 at 01:29:40PM +0200, Kirill A. Korinsky wrote:
> > Stefan,
> > 
> > here the 6th batch of qwz commits.
> > 
> > It is quite mechanical with exception of one commit where I fix REO layout
> > to that I had discovered in ath12k, and the next one fixes its lifetime.
> > 
> > It was tested on my device and makes it works better, but I may make typos.
> > 
> > Ok?
> 
> All OK by me, expect the last one of them:
> 
> > Subject: [PATCH 7/7] sys/qwz: fix REO queue lifetime
> > 
> > Track REO completions before publication and wait for peer unmap,
> > deletion, and cache flushes before reusing queue DMA. Submission errors
> > and timeouts retain ownership; hardware failures block reuse until cold
> > cleanup. HAL error conventions and flush semantics follow ath12k;
> > tracking and the reuse barrier adapt qwz's retained pool.
> 
> This diff is too complicated for me to properly review right now.
> Since you have tested it and it seems to be a needed improvement to get
> this driver to work properly, I won't object to it going in without my OK.
> But I cannot fully endorse this diff.
> 
> I don't like the conversion of some "return errno" to "return -errno".
> The Linux project uses this negative error code convention, but we do not.

Yeah, please don't do that (outside of drm).