RE: [ofa-general] hotplug event handle question

2007-04-26 Thread Sean Hefty
I think the problem is that cma_remove_id_dev overrides the current state, losing state information in the process. Why do we need CMA_DEVICE_REMOVAL at all? Everything seems to work fine just by forwarding RDMA_CM_EVENT_DEVICE_REMOVAL to user, without touching state. I need to read back over the

Re: [ofa-general] hotplug event handle question

2007-04-26 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
Quoting Sean Hefty [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Subject: RE: [ofa-general] hotplug event handle question I think the problem is that cma_remove_id_dev overrides the current state, losing state information in the process. Why do we need CMA_DEVICE_REMOVAL at all? Everything seems to work fine just

RE: [ofa-general] hotplug event handle question

2007-04-26 Thread Sean Hefty
At the very least we need to repeat the check: if (!cma_comp(id_priv, CMA_DESTROYING)) return 0; here to avoid calling the user after they've tried to destroy their id from another callback. See comment above. OK. Would that be enough? Off the top of my head, I don't