Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f180.google.com ([209.85.212.180]:38355 "EHLO mail-wi0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752403AbbGNNXf (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jul 2015 09:23:35 -0400 Received: by wicmv11 with SMTP id mv11so14317208wic.1 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2015 06:23:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/5] RDMA/core: Transport-independent access flags To: Tom Talpey , "'Christoph Hellwig'" References: <559BFE03.4020709@dev.mellanox.co.il> <20150707213628.GA5661@obsidianresearch.com> <559CD174.4040901@dev.mellanox.co.il> <20150708190842.GB11740@obsidianresearch.com> <559D983D.6000804@talpey.com> <20150708233604.GA20765@obsidianresearch.com> <559E54AB.2010905@dev.mellanox.co.il> <20150709170142.GA21921@obsidianresearch.com> <20150711102538.GB14741@infradead.org> <55A4134C.2040301@talpey.com> <20150714073756.GB7630@infradead.org> <55A4D4C6.6040907@dev.mellanox.co.il> <55A4FCB2.8090909@talpey.com> Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , Steve Wise , dledford@redhat.com, sagig@mellanox.com, ogerlitz@mellanox.com, roid@mellanox.com, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, eli@mellanox.com, target-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, trond.myklebust@primarydata.com, bfields@fieldses.org, Oren Duer From: Sagi Grimberg Message-ID: <55A50D51.7030808@dev.mellanox.co.il> Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 16:23:29 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <55A4FCB2.8090909@talpey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 7/14/2015 3:12 PM, Tom Talpey wrote: > On 7/14/2015 5:22 AM, Sagi Grimberg wrote: >> On 7/14/2015 10:37 AM, 'Christoph Hellwig' wrote: >>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 03:36:44PM -0400, Tom Talpey wrote: >>>> On 7/11/2015 6:25 AM, 'Christoph Hellwig' wrote: >>>>> I think what we need to support for now is FRMR as the primary target, >>>>> and FMR as a secondar[y]. >>>> >>>> FMR is a *very* bad choice, for several reasons. >>>> >>>> 1) It's not supported by very many devices, in fact it might even >>>> be thought to be obsolete. >>> >>> It's support by the Mellanox adapters, >> >> *Older* Mellanox adapters. mlx5 (and future drivers I assume) will >> no longer support FMRs. > > Right, but drop the word "will". Mlx5 (the current ConnectX-4) doesn't > support FMR. It's only supported by mlx4 and mthca drivers. > >>> Based on looking at the consumers and the above table I think FMR >>> are still the better fallback for devices that don't support FR, >> >> It's better if you want it fast. > > Do you guys think FMR is actually "fast"? Because it's not. Measure it. > It might have been marginally faster than other schemes in like, 2007, > and only when the mempool was there to leave the registrations open. > Don't go back there. I agree, I meant the pool API which has obvious problems... Sagi.