On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 04:58:30PM +0800, Xiao Yang wrote:

On 2021/1/13 4:09, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 03:17:54PM +0800, Xiao Yang wrote:

quoted

INI QP doesn't require receive CQ.

Signed-off-by: Xiao Yang<redacted>
  drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c | 2 +-
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c b/drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c
index 418d133a8fb0..d8bc8ea3ad1e 100644
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c

@@ -1345,7 +1345,7 @@ static int create_qp(struct uverbs_attr_bundle *attrs,
  		if (has_sq)
  			scq = uobj_get_obj_read(cq, UVERBS_OBJECT_CQ,
  						cmd->send_cq_handle, attrs);
-		if (!ind_tbl)
+		if (!ind_tbl&&  cmd->qp_type != IB_QPT_XRC_INI)
  			rcq = rcq ?: scq;

Hmm, this does make it consistent with the UVERBS_METHOD_QP_CREATE
flow which does set attr.recv_cq to NULL if the user didn't specify one.

However this has been like this since the beginning - what are you
doing that this detail matters?

Hi Jason,

Thanks for your comment.
1) I didn't get any issue for now.
2) I think it is not meaningful to set rcq for XRC INITIATOR QP, current
code has ignores rcq as below:
static int create_qp(struct uverbs_attr_bundle *attrs,
                    struct ib_uverbs_ex_create_qp *cmd)
...
                if (cmd->qp_type == IB_QPT_XRC_INI) {
                        cmd->max_recv_wr = 0;
                        cmd->max_recv_sge = 0;
...

By the way, I have a question:
Why do we need two kinds of uverbs API?(a: read & write, b: ioctl)

The write APIs can't be modified due to how they were
designed. Whenever someone needs to change something they have to move
things to ioctl

Jason