On Wednesday 07 May 2008 17:32:03 Roland Dreier wrote: > > We are not sure if this should be fixed in the driver or in uverbs itself. > > Roland, what's your opinion about this? > > Would be nice to be able to fix it in uverbs but I don't see how. In > particular a kernel consumer has to have the same guarantee that no > async events will come in after destroy QP returns. And I don't see any > way generic code can provide a guarantee about what low-level driver > code may do internally. >
I agree, that's why I posted the driver fix first. So, will you apply it next? Regards Stefan _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
