On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 02:30:29PM +0200, Matan Barak wrote: > I think we should all agree about the extension verbs mechanism before > taking it further. > IMHO, using comp_mask only for fields that their valid value != 0 is confusing. > For example, an old kernel should support a command if: > (a) it knows all its valid bits > (b) all fields after the size it knows is 0 > > In the old schema, the kernel only needs to look at the comp_mask > bits and execute the command or reject it. It doesn't really change anything, the kernel still has to go field by field to check, all that happens is if ((comp_mask & BIT) && offsetof(field..) < size) // field is valid becomes if (offsetof(field..) < size && field != 0) // field is valid > Furthermore, ibv_create_flow and ibv_destroy_flow were already > accepted using the old schema. IIRC they didn't have values that could meaningfully be 0? Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
