[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1488863593.2997.3.camel@sandisk.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 05:13:28 +0000
From: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@...disk.com>
To: "parav@...lanox.com" <parav@...lanox.com>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
"sebott@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <sebott@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linux@...linux.org.uk" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"dwmw2@...radead.org" <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
"bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
"dledford@...hat.com" <dledford@...hat.com>,
"benh@...nel.crashing.org" <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] device: Stop requiring that struct device is
embedded in struct pci_dev
On Tue, 2017-03-07 at 05:08 +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> I replied with pseudo code in previous reply to Bart to bring back dma_device member in the ib_device.
> dma_device member was already present in near past of few weeks.
> It should be able to work using it without performance impact and without touching driver core layer like in this patch.
That's confusing and was a source of bugs and inconsistencies. We do not
want two device structures in struct ib_device (struct device dev and struct
device *dma_device).
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists