Re: [PATCH] IB/ipoib: Enable pkey and device name decoupling

[Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 09:04:36AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 01:42:15PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 09:28:31AM +0300, Alex Vesker wrote:
> > > On 10/19/2017 9:14 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > >On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 12:11:00AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > >>On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 01:21:21PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > >>>>Yes, we should add a deprecation one shot printk to the kernel for the
> > > >>>>sysfs interface to encourage people to use ip
> > > >>>Please don't do that, it won't help for anyone, and especially for the people
> > > >>>who didn't hear about "ip" in 2017.
> > > >>This is the standard kernel way to encourage people to use the new
> > > >>interfaces...
> > > >>
> > > >>>IPoIB netlink doesn't support enhanced IPoIB device because child
> > > >>>device in netlink code was not allocated with rdma_alloc_netdev call
> > > >>>as it was done for other flows.
> > > >>I don't understand, isn't this just a (bad) bug to be fixed?
> > > >Yes and we want to fix it BEFORE adding discouraging warnings.
> >
> > > We plan to block ipoib_netlink in the meanwhile until we fix it.
> >
> > That isn't a good idea, don't break APIs for performance reasons..
> 
> It is not "performance", but simple attempt to prevent kernel panic,
> while calling that function, because I'm unsure if we success to provide
> proper fix till merge window.

Er, why should a non-accelerated ipoib instance panic? That makes no
sense :(

In any event, someone needs to send patches to fix these oops's!

Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html