On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 07:06:05PM +0200, Yishai Hadas wrote: > The above argument could be issued also on SRQ/WQ which are not expected to > be changed in a high rate but uses the attr_mask notation with one system > call. Yep, those perhaps should not have used the attr_mask scheme either > As this is currently the spirit of modify_xxx verbs in both user and kernel, > we may stay with that and consider this change for verbs2.0 all around when > it will come. Well, there seem to be quite a lot of new API proposals now, and stuffing each of them through some goofy comp_mask or attr_mask thing seems like it is going to create a huge complex mess.. 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
