On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 02:42:15PM -0500, Steve Wise wrote:
>
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 09:49:39AM -0700, Steve Wise wrote:
> > > Each provider can register a "fill entry" function with the restrack
> core.
> > > This function will be called when filling out a resource, allowing the
> > > provider to add provider-specific details. The details consist of a
> > > table of nested attributes, that are in the form of "key, value" tuple.
> > > The key nlattr must be strings, and the value nlattr can be one of
> > > provider attributes that are generic, but typed, allowing the nlmessage
> > > to ve validated. Currently the types include string, s32, u32, x32,
> s64,
> > > u64, and x64. The inclusion of x, s, and u variants for numeric
> attributes
> > > allows the user tool to print the number in the desired format.
> > >
> > > More attrs can be defined as they become needed by providers.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Steve Wise <swise@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/infiniband/core/nldev.c | 39
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > include/rdma/restrack.h | 10 ++++++++++
> > > include/uapi/rdma/rdma_netlink.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> > > 3 files changed, 65 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/nldev.c
> > b/drivers/infiniband/core/nldev.c
> > > index 884843e..8346ede 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/infiniband/core/nldev.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/nldev.c
> > > @@ -95,8 +95,27 @@
> > > [RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_PD_ENTRY] = { .type =
> > NLA_NESTED },
> > > [RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_LOCAL_DMA_LKEY] = { .type = NLA_U32 },
> > > [RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_UNSAFE_GLOBAL_RKEY] = { .type =
> > NLA_U32 },
> > > + [RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_PROVIDER] = { .type =
> > NLA_NESTED },
> > > + [RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_PROVIDER_ENTRY] = { .type =
> > NLA_NESTED },
> > > + [RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_PROVIDER_STRING] = { .type =
> > NLA_NUL_STRING,
> > > + .len =
> > RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_PROVIDER_STRLEN },
> > > + [RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_PROVIDER_D32] = { .type = NLA_S32 },
> > > + [RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_PROVIDER_U32] = { .type = NLA_U32 },
> > > + [RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_PROVIDER_X32] = { .type = NLA_U32 },
> > > + [RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_PROVIDER_D64] = { .type = NLA_S64 },
> > > + [RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_PROVIDER_U64] = { .type = NLA_U64 },
> > > + [RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_PROVIDER_X64] = { .type = NLA_U64 },
> > > };
> > >
> > > +static int provider_fill_res_entry(struct rdma_restrack_root *resroot,
> > > + struct sk_buff *msg,
> > > + struct netlink_callback *cb,
> > > + struct rdma_restrack_entry *res)
> > > +{
> > > + return resroot->fill_res_entry ?
> > > + resroot->fill_res_entry(msg, cb, res) : 0;
> > > +}
> >
> > Please add "fill_res_entry = NULL" line into rdma_restrack_init()
> > despite kzalloc usage in ib_alloc_device().
>
>
> Will do.
>
> >
> > And I afraid that we didn't settle the PROVIDER_*64 thing.
> >
>
> I didn't agree that your proposal was simpler, or even avoided the issues
> you said were problems with the self-describing-print-formt attributes. I
> asked if anyone else had an opinion. Nobody replied. So I chose to keep
> the attributes as they are. Are you NAKing this?
Sure not, I'm NAKing only if the code is wrong and/or breaks something.
It is not the case here, the code is correct and the fact that I don't like
your implementation doesn't give me any reason to use "NAK" option.
>
> Jason and Doug, do you have an opinion either way? Our discussion of this
> can be found here:
>
> https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rdma/msg62198.html
>
> Steve
>
> Steve.
>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
