On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 11:11:22AM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote: > This looks fine to me... the only thing I could wonder about is: > > > + RDMA_OPTION_ID_TOS = 0, > > + > > + RDMA_OPTION_IB_PATH = 1 > > why a blank line here? ;) > Jason and Or, does this seem ready to queue for 2.6.33?
I like the API as far as passing IB PRs between kernel and userspace, I'm glad we came up with this. (Sean: I was going to suggest that the second EINVAL should maybe be ENOSUPPORTED or something - so userspace can tell the kernel supports the API but did not accept any of the flags combinations) But, I still think this API should return EINVAL if the cm_id is in AF_INET/AF_INET6 mode. That is to say, this API only works with the AF_IB idea we have been discussing. I suggest this because using this API really does override the capabilities of the AF_INET/6 in unexpected ways, as the discussion drifted through it seemed like at least bonding, routing and ND operations would/could be overridden. If so then I'd say it should be part of an AF_IB patch. Sean, what are your thoughts on applying it to AF_INET/6? Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
