From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mlx5-next 03/25] net/mlx5: Set uid as part of RQ commands
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 15:10:35 -0600
Message-ID: <20180919211035.GQ11367@ziepe.ca>
References: <20180917110418.18937-1-leon@kernel.org>
 <20180917110418.18937-4-leon@kernel.org>
 <20180919172855.GN11367@ziepe.ca>
 <CALzJLG-YOtkm0HBWBrgPOSYy1bcxvW+D2YorjVHCLMQZRpZUbA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALzJLG-YOtkm0HBWBrgPOSYy1bcxvW+D2YorjVHCLMQZRpZUbA@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@dev.mellanox.co.il>
Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>, Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>, Leon Romanovsky <leonro@mellanox.com>, RDMA mailing list <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>, Yishai Hadas <yishaih@mellanox.com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com>, Linux Netdev List <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 11:40:45AM -0700, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 10:28 AM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 02:03:56PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > From: Yishai Hadas <yishaih@mellanox.com>
> > >
> > > Set uid as part of RQ commands so that the firmware can manage the
> > > RQ object in a secured way.
> > >
> > > That will enable using an RQ that was created by verbs application
> > > to be used by the DEVX flow in case the uid is equal.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Yishai Hadas <yishaih@mellanox.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@mellanox.com>
> > >  drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/qp.c | 16 ++++++++++++++--
> > >  include/linux/mlx5/mlx5_ifc.h                |  6 +++---
> > >  2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/qp.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/qp.c
> > > index 04f72a1cdbcc..0ca68ef54d93 100644
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/qp.c
> > > @@ -540,6 +540,17 @@ int mlx5_core_xrcd_dealloc(struct mlx5_core_dev *dev, u32 xrcdn)
> > >  }
> > >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mlx5_core_xrcd_dealloc);
> > >
> > > +static void destroy_rq_tracked(struct mlx5_core_dev *dev, u32 rqn, u16 uid)
> > > +{
> > > +     u32 in[MLX5_ST_SZ_DW(destroy_rq_in)]   = {0};
> > > +     u32 out[MLX5_ST_SZ_DW(destroy_rq_out)] = {0};
> >
> > = {} is the preferred version of this, right?
> >
> > {0} explicitly initializes the first element to zero and only works if
> > the first element happens to be something integral..
> >
> 
> Both are perfectly ok in our scenarios.
> I remember one of the syntaxes yielded a statistic checker warning, i
> don't remember which syntax and what static checker :) ..

{0} will throw a 'missing-field-initializers' compiler warning,
however it recognizes '= {}' as an idom meaning 'zero everything' and
does not throw a warning.

Jason