On Tuesday 14 August 2007 00:37, Roland Dreier wrote: > Yes, in fact I think we might be able to get away with not breaking > the user-kernel ABI. If I understand things correctly, XRC QPs do not > have an SRQ attached to them, so we could overload the srq_handle > member of struct ib_uverbs_create_qp to hold the xrc_domain_handle > when creating an XRC QP. Only caveat -- I'll need to put a comment in the code regarding the overloading (to avoid confusion).
> Then if we're OK with having create_xrc_srq be a separate operation > from create_srq, I think everything else doesn't break the ABI. I've checked -- everything else seems OK. > Does that seem like a good plan? The only ugly thing is making the > interface a little fatter than it needs to be with the duplicated > create_xrc_srq and create_srq operations; but we save the pain of > bumping the ABI and avoid the ugliness of putting generic objects into > the driver-specific data (which would force us to export the lookup of > XRC objects from the uverbs module, etc). I think its the only reasonable plan -- all the other options were much nastier. I'll implement this as described above. - Jack _______________________________________________ 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
