On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 08:20:09PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 01:40:03PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>
> > +static int fill_res_qp_entry(struct sk_buff *msg, bool has_cap_net_admin,
> > + struct rdma_restrack_entry *res, uint32_t port,
> > + bool raw)
> > +{
> > + struct ib_qp *qp = container_of(res, struct ib_qp, res);
> > + struct ib_device *dev = qp->device;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + if (port && port != qp->port)
> > + return -EAGAIN;
> > +
> > + /* In create_qp() port is not set yet */
> > + if (qp->port && nla_put_u32(msg, RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_PORT_INDEX, qp->port))
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + ret = nla_put_u32(msg, RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_LQPN, qp->qp_num);
> > + if (ret)
> > + goto err;
> > +
> > if (!rdma_is_kernel_res(res) &&
> > nla_put_u32(msg, RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_PDN, qp->pd->res.id))
> > goto err;
> >
> > - if (fill_res_name_pid(msg, res))
> > + ret = fill_res_name_pid(msg, res);
> > + if (ret)
> > goto err;
> >
> > - if (dev->ops.fill_res_qp_entry)
> > - return dev->ops.fill_res_qp_entry(msg, qp);
> > - return 0;
> > + if (!raw)
> > + return fill_res_qp_entry_query(msg, res, dev, qp);
>
> Are you sure the RAW query should duplicate all the stuff the normal
> query does? Shouldn't the raw query return only the raw blob?
>
> The rest seems fine, but this is rather odd?
RAW duplicates only fields that are not known to FW, like PID, name
for process identification and port_index, device_index, LQPN for entry
identification. The only one in question is PDN, but it helps to
understand relation between PD and QP, so I would like to keep it.
>
> > @@ -1252,9 +1291,11 @@ static int res_get_common_doit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
> > goto err_get;
> > }
> >
> > - nlh = nlmsg_put(msg, NETLINK_CB(skb).portid, nlh->nlmsg_seq,
> > - RDMA_NL_GET_TYPE(RDMA_NL_NLDEV, fe->nldev_cmd),
> > - 0, 0);
> > + nlh = nlmsg_put(
> > + msg, NETLINK_CB(skb).portid, nlh->nlmsg_seq,
> > + RDMA_NL_GET_TYPE(RDMA_NL_NLDEV,
> > + (raw ? fe->nldev_cmd_raw : fe->nldev_cmd)),
> > + 0, 0);
>
> Isn't this ternary just RMDA_NL_GET_OP(nlh->nlmsg_type) ?
I don't know for sure, let me check it later and send a followup patch if needed.
>
> and I suppose RDMA_NL_GET_TYPE should be named MAKE_TYPE?
RDMA_NL_GET_TYPE came from UAPI header file and renaming this define won't gain us a lot.
Thanks
>
> Jason
