Re: [PATCH v1 ib-next 2/3] IB/core: IB/core: Allow legacy verbs through extended interfaces

2015-11-10 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 08:00:09PM +0200, Eli Cohen wrote: > When an extended verbs is an extension to a legacy verb, the original > functionality is preserved. Hence we do not require each hardware driver > to set the extended capability. This will allow to use the extended verb > in its simple

[PATCH v1 ib-next 2/3] IB/core: IB/core: Allow legacy verbs through extended interfaces

2015-11-10 Thread Eli Cohen
When an extended verbs is an extension to a legacy verb, the original functionality is preserved. Hence we do not require each hardware driver to set the extended capability. This will allow to use the extended verb in its simple form with drivers that do not support the extended capability.

Re: [PATCH v1 ib-next 2/3] IB/core: IB/core: Allow legacy verbs through extended interfaces

2015-11-10 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 09:57:13PM +0200, Eli Cohen wrote: > Yes, we can do this but I think this should be the subject for another > patch, agree? Sure > Regarding using stabs, it may be nice but I don't think performance is > the issue here. Most verbs implementations involve relatively long

Re: [PATCH v1 ib-next 2/3] IB/core: IB/core: Allow legacy verbs through extended interfaces

2015-11-10 Thread Eli Cohen
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 11:21:07AM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 08:00:09PM +0200, Eli Cohen wrote: > > When an extended verbs is an extension to a legacy verb, the original > > functionality is preserved. Hence we do not require each hardware driver > > to set the