[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <77af1425-2d5a-8482-fa39-c83d2056eaa4@samba.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 11:33:15 +0100
From: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@...ba.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>
Cc: linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, samba-technical@...ts.samba.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Pavel Shilovsky <pshilov@...rosoft.com>,
Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] CIFS: SMBD: fix configurations with INFINIBAND=m
Hi Arnd,
> diff --git a/fs/cifs/Kconfig b/fs/cifs/Kconfig
> index 500fd69fb58b..3bfc55c08bef 100644
> --- a/fs/cifs/Kconfig
> +++ b/fs/cifs/Kconfig
> @@ -199,6 +199,7 @@ config CIFS_SMB311
> config CIFS_SMB_DIRECT
> bool "SMB Direct support (Experimental)"
> depends on CIFS && INFINIBAND
> + depends on CIFS=m || INFINIBAND=y
> help
> Enables SMB Direct experimental support for SMB 3.0, 3.02 and 3.1.1.
> SMB Direct allows transferring SMB packets over RDMA. If unsure,
Is this really correct? Should CIFS_SMB_DIRECT be allowed with:
CIFS=n and INFINIBAND=y ???
or
CIFS=m and INFINIBAND=n ???
I guess a more complex logic should be used here
or am I missing something?
metze
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists