From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leon Romanovsky Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next 4/6] RDMA/core: Move HFI1 IOCTL declarations to common file Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:23:48 +0300 Message-ID: <20160818062348.GA7047@leon.nu> References: <1471355123-6227-1-git-send-email-leon@kernel.org> <1471355123-6227-5-git-send-email-leon@kernel.org> <20160817061630.GB27477@phlsvsds.ph.intel.com> <20160817065529.GG5489@leon.nu> <20160817181050.GC27477@phlsvsds.ph.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="a8Wt8u1KmwUX3Y2C" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160817181050.GC27477-W4f6Xiosr+yv7QzWx2u06xL4W9x8LtSr@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: "ira.weiny" Cc: dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Matan Barak , Haggai Eran List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org --a8Wt8u1KmwUX3Y2C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 02:10:51PM -0400, ira.weiny wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 09:55:29AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 02:16:31AM -0400, ira.weiny wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 04:45:21PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > > From: Leon Romanovsky > > > >=20 > > > > Move HFI1 IOCTL declarations to rdma_user_ioctl.h file. > > >=20 > > > I have not tried with the patch but I'm 99% sure this will break the = PSM2 > > > library build which includes hfi1_user.h. > > >=20 > > > This is one of those things I have pondered in the past. Most of the= rdma > > > libraries don't actually use these definitions directly. PSM2 does. > >=20 > > I'm not so convinced about it. > > "#include " was added to hfi1_user.h to share > > all definitions. PSM2 library will see it. >=20 > Ok I see it now. Sorry it was late. >=20 > >=20 > > >=20 > > > I'm not sure what other libraries do. > > >=20 > > > In the final patch of this series you admit that the name changes in = that patch > > > will break userspace which uses the defines directly. Can we, should= we, do > > > that? > >=20 > > I'm talking about __NUM() macros. > >=20 > > Do you really use __NUM(ASSIGN_CTXT) in user application? Why did you do > > it? You supposed to use HFI1_IOCTL_ASSIGN_CTXT instead. >=20 > Your commit message says "... and MAD indexes were renamed. It has the > potential to break application which use these defines directly." >=20 > I took that at face value. I've taken a closer look ... I see now that n= either > the numbers nor the define names changed so ok, my mistake. Sorry for inconvenience, I'll update commit message, so it will better reflect reality. Thanks --a8Wt8u1KmwUX3Y2C Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJXtVR0AAoJEORje4g2clin4p4P/0AllUQVjjpxNN+bCWUCbNbg MkclMLu4Du9vtA3vhs2zoxb+m6i4gXZvpj4uBik7lgniEadnSpiSRH2P+9Xp+1hF in9V668Z4c/LOdHGGumF36R1Bf2L4IPw+uc9V+VhtixOj6RAZsoiO9kZHah2Mf/g B+1wUPDzM6CjZ9SeMbYCLxPUhByJc7hlJ1bGWqM7/PoEgojeW/EZFRBWzYqWTecO uiyVbj4FjdEanpcdhzHfhlueCD+wApn46/qHF5If/TxGy8ooPglICs9pk/IbthqH qoKS1eLFmrvO8IDHw82RAOcpSCJ7E4BZsX6rmWlY8KPeE9RMz+yQ8+T5mbx0klK8 rIPSMMPYCeQ5GOCMg2NA74PkS700Ry1aocI7K6QUWDLUZMnPYkhRZbEFUDmDlipV 2KTAOEWf7xddHgfsgzkWpE1YxTUyljlv2iCNWmAxTx+N3uCGMXnerEnHLbuBPujQ C31mqg3RQODyq6CdgyzE6YYXPCSvlrV37RHrE+5Pavzdro6bEeFTthNzSbYuHZt5 WRRgEJPzZ4glhLG9VIM3SUal1kyJy6lRUyBYTj8+DNt6Oh2fZDv09nh0Hs6dlsfO VcEpQjZgvzaM9nJTNOc7eFKE4U0ZZn8v6hfZtiS1WcMGAm1xbc6lKHo4I32oML4W +Air8wefk3SboKE974Um =259K -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --a8Wt8u1KmwUX3Y2C-- -- 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