Re: [PATCH rdma-next v1 0/7] Separate user/kernel QP creation logic
From: Leon Romanovsky
Date: Tue Aug 03 2021 - 14:21:44 EST
On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 09:17:42PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> 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.
I resent the series.
Thanks
>
> Thanks
>
>
> >
> > Jason