On 6/8/2020 2:46 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 11:47:11AM +0300, Maor Gottlieb wrote:
On 6/2/2020 4:23 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 09:27:02AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 09:21:18AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 09:26:46AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:54:14PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 08:31:21PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 04:54:08PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
From: Maor Gottlieb <maorg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Add support to get MR (mkey) resource dump in RAW format.
Signed-off-by: Maor Gottlieb <maorg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/restrack.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/restrack.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/restrack.c
index 9e1389b8dd9f..834886536127 100644
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/restrack.c
@@ -116,7 +116,8 @@ int mlx5_ib_fill_res_mr_entry(struct sk_buff *msg,
struct nlattr *table_attr;
if (raw)
- return -EOPNOTSUPP;
+ return fill_res_raw(msg, mr->dev, MLX5_SGMT_TYPE_PRM_QUERY_MKEY,
+ mlx5_mkey_to_idx(mr->mmkey.key));
None of the raw functions actually share any code with the non raw
part, why are the in the same function? In fact all the implemenations
just call some other function for raw.
To me this looks like they should should all be a new op
'fill_raw_res_mr_entry' and drop the 'bool'
I don't think that this is right approach, we already created ops per-objects
o remove API multiplexing. Extra de-duplication will create too much ops
without any real benefit.
If there is no code sharing then they should not be in the same
function at all. More ops is not really a problem.
Logically they are the same, user asks to get object property, driver returns.
I'm starting to think it is also a mistake to have the same netlink op
and trigger it by an inbound attribute. Are there other examples of
that in netlink? Feels wrong
I have no idea, don't see it in devlink.c
Jason, do you mean trigger the raw by inbound attribute? I don't see a
reason why not do that. Netlink attributes used for input and
output.
What examples do you have where the input attribute completely changes
the output format?
Jason
I don't have. Anyway I am planning to send v2 with new netlink ops.
