[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <555834D7.5040807@mellanox.com>
Date: Sun, 17 May 2015 09:27:35 +0300
From: Haggai Eran <haggaie@...lanox.com>
To: "Hefty, Sean" <sean.hefty@...el.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
CC: Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Liran Liss <liranl@...lanox.com>,
Guy Shapiro <guysh@...lanox.com>,
Shachar Raindel <raindel@...lanox.com>,
Yotam Kenneth <yotamke@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 for-next 05/13] IB/cm: Reference count ib_cm_ids
On 15/05/2015 22:11, Hefty, Sean wrote:
>> The lifetime if each cm_id is clearly defined:
>>
>> cm_create_cm_id()
>> cm_ref_id() / cm_deref_id()
>> cm_destroy_id()
>>
>> The fact the CM might share a listen (and only a listen) ID behind the
>> scenes is not the caller's problem. That is an implementation choice,
>> each caller stands alone and uses the API properly, assuming it is the
>> only user of the returned cm_id.
>
> Actually, I seriously question why the ib_cm should be modified at all for any of this.
At first I thought of doing all the changes in the rdma_cm module. After
a little thought though, I saw that this would require having a data
structure in rdma_cm that could tell which ib_cm_id to use when
listening on a new rdma_cm_id. That data structure would be indexed by a
service ID. This is exactly what the listen_service_table rb_tree in
ib_cm does, so instead of duplicating the rb_tree's data in another
module, I prefer to make a small change to ib_cm and let it continue
manage that tree.
Haggai
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists