From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Vishwanathapura, Niranjana" Subject: Re: [RFC v1 for accelerated IPoIB 04/25] IB/verb: Add ipoib_options struct and API Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 00:01:09 -0700 Message-ID: <20170314070109.GD79937@knc-06.sc.intel.com> References: <1489429896-10781-1-git-send-email-erezsh@mellanox.com> <1489429896-10781-5-git-send-email-erezsh@mellanox.com> <20170313200136.GA2738@obsidianresearch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170313200136.GA2738@obsidianresearch.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: Erez Shitrit , dledford@redhat.com, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, valex@mellanox.com, leonro@mellanox.com, saedm@mellanox.com, erezsh@dev.mellanox.co.il List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 02:01:36PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >> + /* multicast */ >> + int (*attach_mcast)(struct net_device *dev, struct ib_device *hca, >> + union ib_gid *gid, u16 lid, int set_qkey); >> + int (*detach_mcast)(struct net_device *dev, struct ib_device *hca, >> + union ib_gid *gid, u16 lid); > >It would make more sense to store the struct ib_device pointer in the >struct rdma_netdev. > Agree that it shouldn't be a function parameters. For opa_vnic, I found it convenient to store ib_device pointer in client and device private structures as those will be available in most places anyhow. Niranjana