On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:25:12AM -0800, Bryan Tan wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 09:00:29PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 08:27:20PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 10:51:43AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > The commit 25f07300bfb7 ("vmw_pvrdma: Add SRQ support") causes to build
> > > > failures in Travis CI [1] and on my system too [2].
> > > >
> > > > Please fix.
> > >
> > > I reverted the commit, please fix compilation error and resubmit.
> > >
> > > Commit: 32bf4efb8605 ("Revert "vmw_pvrdma: Add SRQ support" because it causes build failures")
> >
> > Just as a pointer, it fails on the systems with kernel's include/uapi/rdma/vmw_pvrdma-abi.h
> > file available, so fixup is not applied but without your definition yet.
>
> Thanks for the notice, I should have tried building on a kernel without
> the updated ABI header. We had a question though, what would be the best
> approach to fix this?
The cmake scheme always uses the distro header if the distro header
passes the 'test'. Till now the test for pvrdma.h was existance only.
Now that you depend on new stuff, you have to update the test to see
if the header is new enough.
> We didn't bump up the ABI version after discussion on the pull
> request.
Correct.
> there is an ABI version mismatch, or if a macro is not defined (in this
> case, PVRDMA_UAR_SRQ_OFFSET)? I thought that we'd use the fixup over the
> ABI header exposed by the kernel, but my assumption there was wrong.
Look in buildlib/RDMA_LinuxHeaders.cmake and copy something like the
rdma/rdma_netlink.h line, but test for PVRDMA_UAR_SRQ_OFFSET.
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
