> Quoting Roland Dreier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Subject: Re: [PATCH] for-2.6.23 ib/umad: add partition support > > > Did you have something in mind? (new ioctl? re-using existing fields?) > > > > Not all fields are used for both reads and writes. E.g. status is > > unused on a write, and retries is unused on a read. Storing the > > pkey_index on a read seems doable. I think if we do anything on a > > write, we need to make an assumption that the data is currently set to > > 0 by the app. > > I hadn't really thought about it. > > One other thing is that the top 8 bits of flow_label aren't used. I > guess we could steal that, although it's a little ugly. I doubt it > would break existing userspace. > > There is the problem of old kernels silently ignoring the pkey index > though. I'm not sure I see a good way around that. > > I'm beginning to think that just updating the ABI might be the right > answer.
Ugh. OFED 1.2 (with the old ABI) just went out. I wonder - is it time to start making the kernel backwards-compatible? It would be trivial to have userspace supply its own ABI version and have kernel support both new and old ABI if we want to. What do you think? > But let's try to make this be the last ABI break. Are we > pretty sure there's *nothing* else we might ever want to add to the > structure? I can't think of anything right now... It'd be easy to add some extra padding just in case ... -- MST _______________________________________________ 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
