Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 15:52:17 -0400
From: "ira.weiny" <ira.weiny@intel.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com>
Cc: "Hefty, Sean" <sean.hefty@intel.com>,
        Michael Wang <yun.wang@profitbricks.com>,
        Roland Dreier <roland@kernel.org>,
        Hal Rosenstock <hal.rosenstock@gmail.com>,
        "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Tom Tucker <tom@opengridcomputing.com>,
        Steve Wise <swise@opengridcomputing.com>,
        Hoang-Nam Nguyen <hnguyen@de.ibm.com>,
        Christoph Raisch <raisch@de.ibm.com>,
        infinipath <infinipath@intel.com>, Eli Cohen <eli@mellanox.com>,
        "Latif, Faisal" <faisal.latif@intel.com>,
        Jack Morgenstein <jackm@dev.mellanox.co.il>,
        Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@mellanox.com>, Haggai Eran <haggaie@mellanox.com>,
        Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>, Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/28] IB/Verbs: Reform IB-core cm
Message-ID: <20150413195216.GB21467@phlsvsds.ph.intel.com>
References: <552BB470.4090407@profitbricks.com> <552BB552.1030905@profitbricks.com> <20150413181248.GA2464@phlsvsds.ph.intel.com> <1828884A29C6694DAF28B7E6B8A82373A8FC0A3A@ORSMSX109.amr.corp.intel.com> <20150413192930.GA18587@obsidianresearch.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150413192930.GA18587@obsidianresearch.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1540
Lines: 41

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 01:29:30PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 06:40:35PM +0000, Hefty, Sean wrote:
> > > > -	if (rdma_node_get_transport(ib_device->node_type) !=
> > > RDMA_TRANSPORT_IB)
> > > > -		return;
> > > > +	int count = 0;
> > > 
> > > I'm ok with this as an intermediate patch but going forward if we are
> > > going to
> > > have calls like
> > > 
> > > static inline int cap_ib_cm_dev(struct ib_device *device)
> > 
> > I would rather keep everything to checking per port, not per device.
> > Specifically, because we have code that does this:
> 
> Argee.
> 
> I asked Michael for it and stand by it, the property is per-port, not
> per device. Having the per-device tests just muddles the logic, look
> at the trouble Sean notices in #10 when we are now forced to think of
> things clearly.

What about having those be helpers within the corresponding C code?

For example move cap_ib_cm_dev() into cm.c.  Or just put the logic at the top
of cm_add_one()?

I think that having the ib_umad, ib_sa, and ib_cm modules skip devices which
have no ports which support those functions makes the code clean.  But I
understand the desire to have checks from the devices be per port.

Also for these function clean up patches we preserve the existing logic.

Ira

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/