Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757091AbbDPHar (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Apr 2015 03:30:47 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-f47.google.com ([74.125.82.47]:34475 "EHLO mail-wg0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757040AbbDPHai (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Apr 2015 03:30:38 -0400 Message-ID: <552F651A.8040708@profitbricks.com> Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 09:30:34 +0200 From: Michael Wang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hal Rosenstock CC: Roland Dreier , Sean Hefty , Hal Rosenstock , linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tom Tucker , Steve Wise , Hoang-Nam Nguyen , Christoph Raisch , Mike Marciniszyn , Eli Cohen , Faisal Latif , Jack Morgenstein , Or Gerlitz , Haggai Eran , Ira Weiny , Tom Talpey , Jason Gunthorpe , Doug Ledford Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/28] IB/Verbs: Implement new callback query_transport() References: <552BB470.4090407@profitbricks.com> <552BB4FA.5000109@profitbricks.com> <552EAF9D.8050400@dev.mellanox.co.il> In-Reply-To: <552EAF9D.8050400@dev.mellanox.co.il> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1478 Lines: 39 Hi, Hal On 04/15/2015 08:36 PM, Hal Rosenstock wrote: > On 4/13/2015 8:22 AM, Michael Wang wrote: [snip] >> __attribute_const__ enum rdma_transport_type >> @@ -1501,6 +1504,8 @@ struct ib_device { >> int (*query_port)(struct ib_device *device, >> u8 port_num, >> struct ib_port_attr *port_attr); >> + enum rdma_transport_type (*query_transport)(struct ib_device *device, >> + u8 port_num); >> enum rdma_link_layer (*get_link_layer)(struct ib_device *device, >> u8 port_num); >> int (*query_gid)(struct ib_device *device, > > libibverbs also exposes transport at the device level. Isn't a change to > make transport per port rather than per device needed there as well to > be consistent with these proposed kernel changes ? If so, would the > additional IBoE transport be exposed ? We also need to worry about > backward compatibility for existing applications. The proposal of this patch-set is to integrate IB core layer management checking, without noticed by user layer. Later the bitmask reform should not be noticed by core layer, so user layer app should have totally no idea what happened inside kernel ;-) Regards, Michael Wang > > -- Hal > -- 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/