Re: Bad behavior by rdma-core ?

[Bob Pearson <rpearsonhpe@gmail.com>]

On 10/14/21 1:32 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 11:14:57AM -0500, Bob Pearson wrote:
> 
>> But ib_uverbs_destroy_ah does *not* call rdma_uverbs_destroy_ah() it just
>> deletes the object.
> 
> ib_uverbs_destroy_ah
>  uobj_perform_destroy
>   __uobj_perform_destroy
>    __uobj_get_destroy
>     uobj_destroy
>      uverbs_destroy_uobject:
> 
>     	} else if (uobj->object) {
> 		ret = uobj->uapi_object->type_class->destroy_hw(uobj, reason,
> 								attrs);
> 
> Which calls 
> 
> destroy_hw_idr_uobject
>   	int ret = idr_type->destroy_object(uobj, why, attrs);
> 
> Which links to this:
> 
> DECLARE_UVERBS_NAMED_OBJECT(UVERBS_OBJECT_AH,
> 			    UVERBS_TYPE_ALLOC_IDR(uverbs_free_ah),
> 			    &UVERBS_METHOD(UVERBS_METHOD_AH_DESTROY));
> 
> And thus calls
> 
> static int uverbs_free_ah(struct ib_uobject *uobject,
> 			  enum rdma_remove_reason why,
> 			  struct uverbs_attr_bundle *attrs)
> {
> 	return rdma_destroy_ah_user((struct ib_ah *)uobject->object,
> 				    RDMA_DESTROY_AH_SLEEPABLE,
> 				    &attrs->driver_udata);
> }
> 
> So, look along that path and find out where it goes wrong?
> 
> Jason
> 
Thanks

I had more or less figured that out. I looked at other objects and saw a similar pattern.
I think I've traced the problem back to myself.

Bob