On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 10:08:54AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 08:05:57AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 05:10:03PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 06:49:47PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 10:44:09AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, Jun 16, 2024 at 07:15:57PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > @@ -63,6 +63,7 @@ enum uverbs_default_objects {
> > > > > > enum {
> > > > > > UVERBS_ATTR_UHW_IN = UVERBS_UDATA_DRIVER_DATA_FLAG,
> > > > > > UVERBS_ATTR_UHW_OUT,
> > > > > > + UVERBS_ATTR_UHW_DRIVER_DATA,
> > > > >
> > > > > The start of the driver's attributes is not a "UHW", the UHW is only
> > > > > the old structs.
> > > >
> > > > I asked from Akiva to keep existing naming convention UVERBS_ATTR_UHW_XXX
> > > > to emphasize the namespace and the position of this attribute as
> > > > relevant for existing UHW calls.
> > >
> > > Well, calling it DRIVER_DATA and UHW is very confusing when it is
> > > really the start of the indexing for drivers that use UHW.
> > >
> > > A better name is needed
> >
> > UVERBS_ATTR_UHW_PRIVATE ????
>
> I think it need to have the word "start" in it, because it is the
> start of numbers, not an actual number itself.
UVERBS_ATTR_UHW_DRIVER_DATA_START ????
What do you suggest instead?
>
> It is also not PRIVATE at all, this is just in the device specific
> space number space, not the core space.
Private in the sense of driver specific, like net_priv().
>
> Jason
