Re: [PATCH v2 01/17] IB/Verbs: Implement new callback query_transport() for each HW

From: ira.weiny
Date: Fri Apr 10 2015 - 14:12:10 EST

On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 01:49:32PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-04-10 at 13:38 -0400, ira.weiny wrote:
> > > I think if we look closely we'll find that IPoIB today has a hard
> > > requirement on cap_sa being true, so lets use that?
> >
> > I don't think that is appropriate. You have been advocating that the checks
> > be clear as to what support we need. While currently the IPoIB layer does (for
> > IB and OPA) require an SA I think those checks are only appropriate when it is
> > attempting an SA query.
> >
> > The choice to run IPoIB at all is a different matter.
> Appropriately named or not, Jason's choice of words "has a hard
> requirement" is correct ;-)

Agreed. I meant that using "cap_sa" is not appropriate. Not that IPoIB did
not have a hard requirement... :-D

I actually think that _both_ the check for IB link layer and the "cap_sa" is
required. Perhaps not at start up...


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at