Re: [PATCH rdma-next v1 0/7] Separate user/kernel QP creation logic

[Leon Romanovsky]

On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 03:13:12PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 09:10:56PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 12:07:03PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > 
> > > Changelog:
> > > iv1:
> > >  * Fixed typo: incline -> inline/
> > >  * Dropped ib_create_qp_uverbs() wrapper in favour of direct call.
> > >  * Moved kernel-doc to the actual ib_create_qp() function that users will use.
> > > v0: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1626846795.git.leonro@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > The "QP allocation" series shows clearly how convoluted the create QP
> > > flow and especially XRC_TGT flow, where it calls to kernel verb just
> > > to pass some parameters as NULL to the user create QP verb.
> > > 
> > > This series is a small step to make clean XRC_TGT flow by providing
> > > more clean user/kernel create QP verb separation.
> > > 
> > > It is based on the "QP allocation" series.
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > > 
> > > Leon Romanovsky (7):
> > >   RDMA/mlx5: Delete not-available udata check
> > >   RDMA/core: Delete duplicated and unreachable code
> > >   RDMA/core: Remove protection from wrong in-kernel API usage
> > >   RDMA/core: Reorganize create QP low-level functions
> > >   RDMA/core: Configure selinux QP during creation
> > >   RDMA/core: Properly increment and decrement QP usecnts
> > >   RDMA/core: Create clean QP creations interface for uverbs
> > > 
> > >  drivers/infiniband/core/core_priv.h           |  59 +----
> > >  drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c          |  31 +--
> > >  drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_std_types_qp.c |  29 +--
> > >  drivers/infiniband/core/verbs.c               | 208 +++++++++++-------
> > >  drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/qp.c               |   3 -
> > >  include/rdma/ib_verbs.h                       |  16 +-
> > >  6 files changed, 157 insertions(+), 189 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Jason,
> > 
> > Can we progress with this series too?
> 
> It doesn't apply, can you resend it quickly?

Why?

It is in my tree and it was on top of QP allocation patches.

Thanks


> 
> Jason