On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 11:37:04AM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 10:59:52PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > We have many cases where parts of the uapi are not supported in a driver,
> > needs a certain protocol, or whatever. It is best to reflect this directly
> > into the struct uverbs_api when it is built so that everything is simply
> > blocked off, and future introspection can report a proper supported list.
> >
> > This is done by adding some additional helpers to the definition list
> > language that disable objects based on a 'supported' call back, and a
> > helper that disables based on a NULL struct ib_device function pointer.
> >
> > Disablement is global. For instance, if a driver disables an object then
> > everything connected to that object is removed, including core methods.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> > + if (!attr_elm->spec.mandatory)
> > + continue;
> > + obj_key = uapi_get_obj_id(&attr_elm->spec);
> > + if (obj_key == UVERBS_API_KEY_ERR)
> > + continue;
> > + tmp_obj = uapi_get_object(uapi, obj_key);
> > + if (IS_ERR(tmp_obj)) {
> > + if (PTR_ERR(tmp_obj) == -ENOMSG)
> > + continue;
> > + } else {
> > + if (!tmp_obj->disabled)
> > + continue;
> > + }
>
> This is a rebasing error, in rdma.git for-next uapi_get_object()
> returns NULL, not ERR_PTR, I fixed it, but you'll need to move this
> hunk to where it belongs in your queue..
Very strange, I thought that I fixed such error.
I'll double check. Do you want me to resend?
Thanks
>
> Jason
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
