[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181128222558.GI19914@ziepe.ca>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2018 15:25:58 -0700
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: Steve Wise <swise@...ngridcomputing.com>
Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, dsahern@...il.com,
stephen@...workplumber.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, BMT@...ich.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC iproute2-next 1/2] rdma: add 'link add/delete'
commands
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 04:21:48PM -0600, Steve Wise wrote:
> >> It does make sense to not require type. The name must be unique so that
> >> should be enough. I'll have to respin the kernel side though...
> > The delete_link really should be an operation on the ib_device, not
> > the link_ops thing.
> >
> > That directly prevents mis-matching function callbacks..
> >
> > Jason
> Looking at the rtnetlink newlink/dellink, I see they cache the link_ops
> ptr in the net_device struct. So when the link is deleted, then
> appropriate driver-specific dellink function can be called after finding
> the device to be deleted. Should I do something along these lines? IE
> add a struct rdma_link_ops pointer to struct ib_device.
I don't see a problem with that either..
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists