Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <33ab688e-88c9-d950-be66-f0f79774ff6c@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Thu, 6 Apr 2023 13:14:28 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.9.1
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 0/9] net/smc: Introduce SMC-D-based OS
 internal communication acceleration
To:     Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>,
        Wen Gu <guwen@linux.alibaba.com>, kgraul@linux.ibm.com,
        wenjia@linux.ibm.com, jaka@linux.ibm.com, davem@davemloft.net,
        edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com
Cc:     linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <1679887699-54797-1-git-send-email-guwen@linux.alibaba.com>
 <6156aaad710bc7350cbae6cb821289c8a37f44bb.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From:   Alexandra Winter <wintera@linux.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <6156aaad710bc7350cbae6cb821289c8a37f44bb.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 05.04.23 19:04, Niklas Schnelle wrote:
> One more question though, what about the SEID why does that have to be
> fixed and at least partially match what ISM devices use? I think I'm
> missing some SMC protocol/design detail here. I'm guessing this would
> require a protocol change?
> 
> Thanks,
> Niklas

Niklas,
in the initial SMC CLC handshake the client and server exchange the SEID (one per peer system)
and up to 8 proposals for SMC-D interfaces.
Wen's current proposal assumes that smc-d loopback can be one of these 8 proposed interfaces,
iiuc. So on s390 the proposal can contain ISM devices and a smc-d loopback device at the same time.
If one of the peers is e.g. an older Linux version, it will just ignore the loopback-device
in the list (Don't find a match for CHID 0xFFFF) and use an ISM interface for SMC-D if possible.
Therefor it is important that the SEID is used in the same way as it is today in the handshake.

If we decide for some reason (virtio-ism open issues?) that a protocol change/extension is
required/wanted, then it is a new game and we can come up with new identifiers, but we may
lose compatibility to backlevel systems.

Alexandra