[lkml]   [2015]   [Apr]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 07/28] IB/Verbs: Reform IB-ulp ipoib
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 03:46:03PM -0400, ira.weiny wrote:

> > This doesn't quite look right, it should be 'goto error1'
> Looks like you replied to the wrong patch. ?? I don't see error1 in ipoib_add_one.

> For the ib_cm module...

Right, sorry.

> Yes I think it should go to "error1". However, see below...
> This is the type of clean up error which would be avoided if a call to
> cap_ib_cm_dev() were done at the top of the function.

So what does cap_ib_cm_dev return in your example:

> Dev
> port 1 : cap_is_cm == true
> port 2 : cap_is_cm == false
> port 3 : cap_is_cm == true

True? Then the code is still broken, having cap_ib_cm_dev doesn't help

If we make it possible to be per port then it has to be fixed.

If you want to argue the above example is illegal and port 2 has to be
on a different device, I'd be interested to see what that looks like.

Thinking about it some more, cap_foo_dev only makes sense if all ports
are either true or false. Mixed is a BUG.

That seems reasonable, and solves the #10 problem, but we should
enforce this invariant during device register.

Typically the ports seem to be completely orthogonal (like SA), so in those
cases the _dev and restriction makes no sense.

CM seems to be different, so it should probably enforce its rules


 \ /
  Last update: 2015-04-13 22:41    [W:0.222 / U:1.276 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site