On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 08:21:09AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 07:42:03AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 08:04:16PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 01:18:53PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > @@ -916,21 +916,24 @@ static int ib_uverbs_alloc_mw(struct uverbs_attr_bundle *attrs)
> > > > goto err_put;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > - mw = pd->device->ops.alloc_mw(pd, cmd.mw_type, &attrs->driver_udata);
> > > > - if (IS_ERR(mw)) {
> > > > - ret = PTR_ERR(mw);
> > > > + mw = rdma_zalloc_drv_obj(ib_dev, ib_mw);
> > > > + if (!mw) {
> > > > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > > > goto err_put;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > - mw->device = pd->device;
> > > > - mw->pd = pd;
> > > > + mw->device = ib_dev;
> > > > + mw->pd = pd;
> > > > mw->uobject = uobj;
> > > > - atomic_inc(&pd->usecnt);
> > > > -
> > > > uobj->object = mw;
> > > > + mw->type = cmd.mw_type;
> > > >
> > > > - memset(&resp, 0, sizeof(resp));
> > > > - resp.rkey = mw->rkey;
> > > > + ret = pd->device->ops.alloc_mw(mw, &mw->rkey, &attrs->driver_udata);
> > >
> > > Why the strange &mw->rkey ? Can't the drivers just do mw->rkey = foo ?
> >
> > We can, if we want to allow drivers set fields in ib_* structures that
> > there passed as part of alloc_* flows.
>
> This is better than passing weird loose pointers around
I don't think that it is right approach, but I'll change.
Thanks
>
> Jason
