On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 01:29:30PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 06:40:35PM +0000, Hefty, Sean wrote: > > > > - if (rdma_node_get_transport(ib_device->node_type) != > > > RDMA_TRANSPORT_IB) > > > > - return; > > > > + int count = 0; > > > > > > I'm ok with this as an intermediate patch but going forward if we are > > > going to > > > have calls like > > > > > > static inline int cap_ib_cm_dev(struct ib_device *device) > > > > I would rather keep everything to checking per port, not per device. > > Specifically, because we have code that does this: > > Argee. > > I asked Michael for it and stand by it, the property is per-port, not > per device. Having the per-device tests just muddles the logic, look > at the trouble Sean notices in #10 when we are now forced to think of > things clearly.
What about having those be helpers within the corresponding C code? For example move cap_ib_cm_dev() into cm.c. Or just put the logic at the top of cm_add_one()? I think that having the ib_umad, ib_sa, and ib_cm modules skip devices which have no ports which support those functions makes the code clean. But I understand the desire to have checks from the devices be per port. Also for these function clean up patches we preserve the existing logic. Ira -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
