Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753514AbbDQILy (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Apr 2015 04:11:54 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-f49.google.com ([74.125.82.49]:36714 "EHLO mail-wg0-f49.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752800AbbDQILR (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Apr 2015 04:11:17 -0400 Message-ID: <5530C021.4000006@profitbricks.com> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:11:13 +0200 From: Michael Wang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Talpey , "Hefty, Sean" , Hal Rosenstock CC: Roland Dreier , Hal Rosenstock , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Tom Tucker , Steve Wise , Hoang-Nam Nguyen , Christoph Raisch , infinipath , Eli Cohen , "Latif, Faisal" , Jack Morgenstein , Or Gerlitz , Haggai Eran , "Weiny, Ira" , Jason Gunthorpe , Doug Ledford Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/27] IB/Verbs: Reform cm related part in IB-core cma/ucm References: <552F6CF2.4000606@profitbricks.com> <552F6DEA.9080701@profitbricks.com> <552FB4D0.5080302@dev.mellanox.co.il> <552FB6EF.80107@profitbricks.com> <1828884A29C6694DAF28B7E6B8A82373A8FC22C3@ORSMSX109.amr.corp.intel.com> <552FD3BE.4090204@profitbricks.com> <552FEFAC.6080402@talpey.com> In-Reply-To: <552FEFAC.6080402@talpey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2025 Lines: 68 On 04/16/2015 07:21 PM, Tom Talpey wrote: > On 4/16/2015 11:22 AM, Michael Wang wrote: >> >> >> On 04/16/2015 04:31 PM, Hefty, Sean wrote: >>>>> This is equivalent to today where the checks are per node rather than >>>>> per port. >>>>> >>>>> Should all checks here be port 1 based or only certain ones like listen >>>>> ? For example, in connect/reject/disconnect, don't we already have port >>>>> ? Guess this can be dealt with later as this is not a regression from >>>>> the current implementation. >>>> >>>> Yeah, these parts of cma may need more carve in future, like some new >>>> callback >>>> for different CM type as Sean suggested. >>>> >>>> Maybe directly using 1 could help to highlight the problem ;-) >>> >>> Only a few checks need to be per device. I think I pointed those out previously. Testing should show anywhere that we miss fairly quickly, since port would still be 0. For the checks that can be updated to be per port, I would rather go ahead and convert them. >> >> Got it, will be changed in next version :-) >> >> To be confirmed: >> PORT ASSIGNED >> rdma_init_qp_attr Y >> rdma_destroy_id unknown >> cma_listen_on_dev N >> cma_bind_loopback N >> rdma_listen N > > Why "N"? rdma_listen() can be constrained to a single port, right? > And even if wildcarded, it needs to act on multiple ports, which is > to say, it will fail only if no ports are eligible. Yeah, it can or can't, maybe 'unknown' is better :-) Regards, Michael Wang > > Tom. > > >> rdma_connect Y >> rdma_accept Y >> rdma_reject Y >> rdma_disconnect Y >> ib_ucm_add_one N >> >> Is this list correct? >> >> Regards, >> Michael Wang >> >>> >>> - Sean >>> >> >> > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/