From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [RFC] Registering non-contiguous memory Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2017 10:12:22 -0600 Message-ID: <20171102161222.GH18874@ziepe.ca> References: <20171101165625.GE1030@ziepe.ca> <20171102050942.GU16127@mtr-leonro.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171102050942.GU16127-U/DQcQFIOTAAJjI8aNfphQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Leon Romanovsky Cc: Alex Margolin , "'linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org'" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 07:09:42AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 10:56:25AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 11:11:42AM +0000, Alex Margolin wrote: > > > > > struct verbs_context { > > > /* "grows up" - new fields go here */ > > > + struct ib_mw * (*alloc_mw_ex)(struct ibv_mw_alloc_attr > > > *mw_alloc_attr); > > > > This patch is full of weird little mistakes like the above, wouldn't > > compile and doesn't really seem capture the proposed API. > > Those RFCs are intended to present concept and implementation direction. > It is a little bit over-expectation to have working code and clean UAPI > at this stage. Clear communication is important. If you have to send a code snippit to explain the idea then it had better 'work'. I'm not asking for an implementation, but certainly correct changes to verbs.h > > We are now asking for complete rdma-core patches before talking about > > merging new kernel uapi features. Please retry this RFC with the new > > requirement. > > There are steps in development process, and first step before rushing > into implementation details is to talk about concept. This is exactly > what Alex did. Mellanox already did the concept step internally, if you want external review you need to clearly communicate the idea, and I don't think these RFCs are detailed or clear enough. Header file patch, man pages, documentation and an example are the logical next steps to vet a proposed verbs API in the public forum. This is analogous to a standards body context, where the next step would be to draft standards language, eg 'man pages' and API signatures. 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