From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next v1 1/6] IB/uverbs: Allow CQ moderation with modify CQ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2017 14:16:52 -0700 Message-ID: <20171110211652.GG17451@ziepe.ca> References: <20171029135140.32649-1-leon@kernel.org> <20171029135140.32649-2-leon@kernel.org> <20171029174345.GC4488@ziepe.ca> <20171029182808.GN16127@mtr-leonro.local> <20171030144807.GA12392@ziepe.ca> <20171030152815.GA16127@mtr-leonro.local> <1510341329.3735.19.camel@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1510341329.3735.19.camel-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Doug Ledford Cc: Leon Romanovsky , linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Yonatan Cohen List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 02:15:29PM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote: > signature of ib_modify_cq to a generic, extendable signature, or we need > to change the name as Jason points out so we match name and parameter > signature in the same spirit. The kernel side should focus on setting cq moderation, as I understand we have ULPs that want to adjust this dynamically so higher performance through a simplified API makes the most sense. No need to mirror libibverbs. > Let's please make this consistent before merging. BTW, because so much > of the rest of the API uses things like modify_qp with an attr struct > and a single entry point, I'm leaning towards following that here for > the sake of API consistency. Should we introduce a create_cq_ex as well at this point? It is really weird in verbs to have a modify attrs without a create also accepting the attrs. 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