On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 07:40:39PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > The protection is done with global device_lock because it is used in
> > > allocation and deallocation phases. At this stage, this lock is not
> > > busy and easily can be moved to be per-device, once it will be needed.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > drivers/infiniband/core/device.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > include/rdma/ib_verbs.h | 8 +++++++-
> > > 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/device.c b/drivers/infiniband/core/device.c
> > > index 5a680a88aa87..3270cde6d806 100644
> > > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/device.c
> > > @@ -170,6 +170,14 @@ static struct ib_device *__ib_device_get_by_name(const char *name)
> > > return NULL;
> > > }
> > >
> > > +void ib_device_get_name(struct ib_device *ibdev, char *name)
> > > +{
> > > + down_read(&lists_rwsem);
> > > + strlcpy(name, ibdev->name, IB_DEVICE_NAME_MAX);
> > > + up_read(&lists_rwsem);
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(ib_device_get_name);
> >
> > I think we have to follow netdev and just rely on device_rename()
> > being 'good enough'.
> >
> > Switch everything to use dev_name()/etc rather than try and do
> > something like this so the responsibility is on the device core to
> > keep this working, not us.
> >
> > Turns out I have a series for that for unrelated reasons..
>
> And what should I do now with this knowledge?
Maybe I can send it today..
Jason
