On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 09:58:44PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 05:15:15PM +0200, Shamir Rabinovitch wrote: > > This change has 2 steps. First step is to change the resource tracker > > so it will not use ib_x uobject pointer to figure if ib_x object was > > created by uverbs/kernel. The second step is to use the resource > > tracker ability to tell if ib_pd was created by uverbs/kernel and > > replace every place in the code where the code test for valid ib_pd > > uobject pointer just to tell if the ib_pd was created by uverbs/kernel. > > > > This series is the first step toward releasing the code from the dependency > > in the uobject pointer in the ib_pd. This change is required before we can > > move to shared ib_pd model. > > > > Changelog: > > v2: > > * Patch 1: Comments from Jason & Leon > > - Fix bool assign > > - Add rdma_restrack_kadd, rdma_restrack_uadd > > - Remove res_is_user > > - Fix rdma_is_kernel_res > > * Patch 2: Comments from Jason > > - Fix rdma_is_user_pd > > * Patch 3: Comments from Jason to add cleanup patch > > * Patch 4: Comments from Jason which include the missing patch 3 > > v3: > > * Patch 1: Add patch to fix mlx5_core issue where restrack was not > > initialized for some ib_x objects allocated by the driver. > > * Patch 5: Fixed hns build issue reported by kbuild > > v4: > > * Patch 3: Extend the use of udata follow comments from Jason > > on patch 4 > > * Patch 4: Follow the change in patch 3, this now became more > > focused on the ib_x destroy where udata is not available. > > > > Shamir Rabinovitch (4): > > RDMA/restrack: resource-tracker should not use uobject pointers > > IB/hw: cleanup of incorrect pd->uobject usage > > I've applied these two to for-next, with the below modifications. > Don't we learn lately that bool in struct is not cool anymore? Thanks,
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
