From: "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,
"parav@mellanox.com" <parav@mellanox.com>,
"sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linux@armlinux.org.uk" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"dwmw2@infradead.org" <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
"bhelgaas@google.com" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"dledford@redhat.com" <dledford@redhat.com>,
"benh@kernel.crashing.org" <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] device: Stop requiring that struct device is embedded in struct pci_dev
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 18:14:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170307171403.GA19293@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1488905685.2739.1.camel@sandisk.com>
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 04:54:58PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-03-07 at 05:52 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > Somehow all other subsystems work just fine, don't instantly think that
> > the driver core needs to bend to the will of the IB code, because you
> > are somehow "special". Hint, you aren't :)
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> In another e-mail Parav compared IB drivers with networking drivers.
Great, then notice that networking drivers don't need to do this type of
crud :)
> But I think that's a bad comparison: in the networking stack it's the
> network driver itself that sets up and triggers DMA while in the IB
> stack it's the upper layer protocol (ULP) driver that calls the
> functions defined in struct dma_ops. For some IB HW drivers (hfi1, qib
> and rdma_rxe) the ULP driver must
> use the DMA mapping operations from lib/dma-virt.c while for all other IB HW
> drivers the ULP driver must use the PCI DMA mapping functions. The ib_dma_*()
> functions select the right DMA mapping operations - either the PCI DMA
> mapping operations or those from lib/dma-virt.c. My question to you is how we
> should organize struct ib_device such that we can get rid of the ib_dma_*()
> helper functions. How to make sure that the to_pci_dev() translation works
> correctly for the device structure that is embedded in struct ib_device?
> Should a pointer to struct pci_dev be embedded in struct device (as done in
> patch 1/2 in this series)
I already said no to this, why do you think that it is still ok?
> or should the struct device in ib_device be changed
> into a struct pci_dev
Ick, no.
> and should the pci_dev information from /sys/devices/pci*/*/* be
> duplicated into the pci_dev information in struct ib_device
> (/sys/devices/pci*/*/*/infiniband/*)?
I don't think you really thought that one through :)
> For the latter approach, would
> there be a risk that the duplicated information becomes inconsistent?
No, it just wouldn't work :)
Why not just save off a pointer to your pci_dev in your ib_device
structure? That way you know what the type is, and you have access to
everything you need.
But hey, I know nothing about IB and I really want to keep it that way.
You do what you want to, as long as you don't abuse the driver model,
like your patch 1/2 did. Remember, not all the world is IB.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-07 19:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-07 0:35 [PATCH 0/2] IB/core fixes for kernel v4.11-rc Bart Van Assche
2017-03-07 0:35 ` [PATCH 1/2] device: Stop requiring that struct device is embedded in struct pci_dev Bart Van Assche
2017-03-07 2:41 ` Parav Pandit
2017-03-07 2:44 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-03-07 4:50 ` gregkh
2017-03-07 3:21 ` Parav Pandit
2017-03-07 4:52 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-03-07 5:08 ` Parav Pandit
2017-03-07 5:13 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-03-07 5:20 ` Parav Pandit
2017-03-07 16:54 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-03-07 17:14 ` gregkh [this message]
2017-03-07 18:27 ` Parav Pandit
2017-03-08 1:52 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2017-03-07 0:35 ` [PATCH 2/2] IB/core: Restore I/O MMU, s390 and powerpc support Bart Van Assche
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170307171403.GA19293@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=dledford@redhat.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=parav@mellanox.com \
--cc=sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®