> > On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 10:01:09AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > Regarding the name, I personally think that cm_id is better because it > > is general and applicable both to ib_cm and iw_cm. The separation > > between them can be done with introduction of new netlink attribute, e.g. > > cm_id_type. > > In netlink the attributes should be self-describing, or intrinsically > related to something mandatory and fundamental about their container > (eg AF_ family in rtnl) > > What information do we actually need from the cm_id in various > protocol families? > Looking at iw_cm_id and iwcm_id_private: tos, mapped, state, flags, refcount. -- 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
