On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 04:50:23PM +0000, Bernard Metzler wrote: > -----"Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@xxxxxxxx> wrote: ----- > > >To: "Bernard Metzler" <bmt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >From: "Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@xxxxxxxx> > >Date: 12/09/2019 05:07PM > >Cc: linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, krishna2@xxxxxxxxxxx, leon@xxxxxxxxxx > >Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH for-next] RDMA/siw: Simplify QP > >representation. > > > >On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 05:25:09PM +0100, Bernard Metzler wrote: > >> Change siw_qp to contain ib_qp. Use ib_qp's uobject pointer > >> to distinguish kernel level and user level applications. > >> Apply same mechanism for kerne/user level application > >> detection to shared receive queues and completion queues. > > > >Drivers should not touch the uobject. If I recall you can use > >restrack > >to tell if it is kernel or user created > > > 'bool res->user' would probably be it, but I stumbled > upon this comment (e.g. in struct ib_qp): > > /* > * Implementation details of the RDMA core, don't use in drivers: > */ > struct rdma_restrack_entry res; > > > So we shall not use restrack information in drivers..? > Shall restrack better export a query such as > 'rdma_restrack_is_user(resource)'? rdma_is_kernel_res() inside include/rdma/restrack.h I added the comment mentioned above before we started to remove uobject accesses. Thanks
