From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steve Wise Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 iproute2-next 1/4] rdma: add helper rd_sendrecv_msg() Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 11:19:12 -0600 Message-ID: <7f48fc85-45ab-fe7d-9614-4c5eb50f8401@opengridcomputing.com> References: <20190223092615.GM23561@mtr-leonro.mtl.com> <20190223093122.GO23561@mtr-leonro.mtl.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20190223093122.GO23561@mtr-leonro.mtl.com> Content-Language: en-US Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Leon Romanovsky Cc: dsahern@gmail.com, stephen@networkplumber.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 2/23/2019 3:31 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 11:26:15AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 08:19:03AM -0800, Steve Wise wrote: >>> This function sends the constructed netlink message and then >>> receives the response, displaying any error text. >>> >>> Change 'rdma dev set' to use it. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Steve Wise >>> --- >>> rdma/dev.c | 2 +- >>> rdma/rdma.h | 1 + >>> rdma/utils.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/rdma/dev.c b/rdma/dev.c >>> index 60ff4b31e320..d2949c378f08 100644 >>> --- a/rdma/dev.c >>> +++ b/rdma/dev.c >>> @@ -273,7 +273,7 @@ static int dev_set_name(struct rd *rd) >>> mnl_attr_put_u32(rd->nlh, RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_DEV_INDEX, rd->dev_idx); >>> mnl_attr_put_strz(rd->nlh, RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_DEV_NAME, rd_argv(rd)); >>> >>> - return rd_send_msg(rd); >>> + return rd_sendrecv_msg(rd, seq); >>> } >>> >>> static int dev_one_set(struct rd *rd) >>> diff --git a/rdma/rdma.h b/rdma/rdma.h >>> index 547bb5749a39..20be2f12c4f8 100644 >>> --- a/rdma/rdma.h >>> +++ b/rdma/rdma.h >>> @@ -115,6 +115,7 @@ bool rd_check_is_key_exist(struct rd *rd, const char *key); >>> */ >>> int rd_send_msg(struct rd *rd); >>> int rd_recv_msg(struct rd *rd, mnl_cb_t callback, void *data, uint32_t seq); >>> +int rd_sendrecv_msg(struct rd *rd, unsigned int seq); >>> void rd_prepare_msg(struct rd *rd, uint32_t cmd, uint32_t *seq, uint16_t flags); >>> int rd_dev_init_cb(const struct nlmsghdr *nlh, void *data); >>> int rd_attr_cb(const struct nlattr *attr, void *data); >>> diff --git a/rdma/utils.c b/rdma/utils.c >>> index 069d44fece10..a6f2826c9605 100644 >>> --- a/rdma/utils.c >>> +++ b/rdma/utils.c >>> @@ -664,6 +664,27 @@ int rd_recv_msg(struct rd *rd, mnl_cb_t callback, void *data, unsigned int seq) >>> return ret; >>> } >>> >>> +static int null_cb(const struct nlmsghdr *nlh, void *data) >>> +{ >>> + return MNL_CB_OK; >>> +} >>> + >>> +int rd_sendrecv_msg(struct rd *rd, unsigned int seq) >>> +{ >>> + int ret; >>> + >>> + ret = rd_send_msg(rd); >>> + if (ret) { >>> + perror(NULL); >> This is more or less already done in rd_send_msg() and that function >> prints something in case of execution error. So the missing piece >> is to update rd_recv_msg(), so all places will "magically" print errors >> and not only dev_set_name(). >> >>> + goto out; >>> + } >>> + ret = rd_recv_msg(rd, null_cb, rd, seq); > Will this "null_cb" work for all send/recv flows or only in flows where > response can be error only? Only those flows where no nl attributes are expected to be returned. > Will we need this recv_msg if we implement > extack support? I'm not sure how extack works.  Do you know? Thanks! Steve.