On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 15:59:10 +0200
Leon Romanovsky <leon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I absolutely agree with that statement. But please notice that the
> > commit date of commit c2261dd76b54 ("RDMA/device: Add
> > ib_device_set_netdev() as an alternative to get_netdev") predates the
> > commit date of commit 54903572c23c ("net/smc: allow pnetid-less
> > configuration") only by 9 days. And before commit c2261dd76b54
> > ("RDMA/device: Add ib_device_set_netdev() as an alternative to
> > get_netdev") there was no
> > ib_device_get_netdev() AFAICT.
>
> It doesn't make it right.
I agree!
>
> 1. While commit c2261dd76b54 was submitted and discussed, RDMA was not
> CCed.
Would the RDMA community agree with adding
L: linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
to the "SHARED MEMORY COMMUNICATIONS (SMC) SOCKETS" section of the
MAINTAINERS file, so that get_maintainer.pl tells contributors to cc
RDMA?
In my personal opinion SMC would have benefited greatly from review by
the RDMA community, and this is not the first time where the RDMA
community was not included where it should have been.
> 2. Author didn't try to add his version of ib_device_get_netdev() as it
> is done for all APIs exposed by RDMA core.
I understand now that direct access to ops callbacks is off limits for
ULPs. I'm not sure I understand all the details, but I hope I don't have
to.
Regards,
Halil
