On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 10:29:14AM +0300, Matan Barak wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Jason Gunthorpe
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 03:14:10PM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> >
> >> + struct ib_cq_init_attr cq_attr;
> >>
> >> /* Create new device info */
> >> port_priv = kzalloc(sizeof *port_priv, GFP_KERNEL);
> >> @@ -2943,9 +2944,11 @@ static int ib_mad_port_open(struct ib_device
> >> *device,
> >> if (has_smi)
> >> cq_size *= 2;
> >>
> >> + memset(&cq_attr, 0, sizeof(cq_attr));
> >> + cq_attr.cqe = cq_size;
> >
> > Why does this patch switch to using memset when the prior patch used
> > = {} ?
> >
>
> Why does it matter? Both are valid approaches, aren't they?
Sure, but why mix and match techniques in the same code base? Is there
a reason?
> >> @@ -1075,12 +1075,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(ib_destroy_qp);
> >> struct ib_cq *ib_create_cq(struct ib_device *device,
> >> ib_comp_handler comp_handler,
> >> void (*event_handler)(struct ib_event *, void *),
> >> - void *cq_context, int cqe, int comp_vector)
> >> + void *cq_context, struct ib_cq_init_attr *cq_attr)
> >> {
> >> struct ib_cq *cq;
> >> - struct ib_cq_init_attr attr = {.cqe = cqe, .comp_vector =
> >> comp_vector};
> >>
> >> - cq = device->create_cq(device, &attr, NULL, NULL);
> >> + cq = device->create_cq(device, cq_attr, NULL, NULL);
> >
> > How does this compile without warnings?
> >
>
> Do you mean that there's a missing const here? It doesn't (and shouldn't)
> cause warnings.
Warnings will be emitted when you compile with -Wcast-qual (make W=3).
Some of the static tools may warn/error on implicitly casting away
const, I'm not sure.
It is broadly undesirable to implicitly cast away const, even if the
Kernel warning defaults don't produce the message.
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
