On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 12:47:11PM +0100, Halil Pasic wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 15:59:10 +0200
> Leon Romanovsky <leon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > I absolutely agree with that statement. But please notice that the
> > > commit date of commit c2261dd76b54 ("RDMA/device: Add
> > > ib_device_set_netdev() as an alternative to get_netdev") predates the
> > > commit date of commit 54903572c23c ("net/smc: allow pnetid-less
> > > configuration") only by 9 days. And before commit c2261dd76b54
> > > ("RDMA/device: Add ib_device_set_netdev() as an alternative to
> > > get_netdev") there was no
> > > ib_device_get_netdev() AFAICT.
> >
> > It doesn't make it right.
>
> I agree!
> >
> > 1. While commit c2261dd76b54 was submitted and discussed, RDMA was not
> > CCed.
>
> Would the RDMA community agree with adding
> L: linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> to the "SHARED MEMORY COMMUNICATIONS (SMC) SOCKETS" section of the
> MAINTAINERS file, so that get_maintainer.pl tells contributors to cc
> RDMA?
Yes, of course. We always curious to see how our in-kernel API works and
if it needs adjustments rather than ULP hacks to overcome its limitations.
>
> In my personal opinion SMC would have benefited greatly from review by
> the RDMA community, and this is not the first time where the RDMA
> community was not included where it should have been.
Jakub pushes SMC authors to CC RDMA, which is great, but it wasn't in
the past and your idea of adding new entry to MAINTAINERS file will
help.
>
> > 2. Author didn't try to add his version of ib_device_get_netdev() as it
> > is done for all APIs exposed by RDMA core.
>
> I understand now that direct access to ops callbacks is off limits for
> ULPs. I'm not sure I understand all the details, but I hope I don't have
> to.
>
> Regards,
> Halil
