From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Steve Wise" Subject: RE: [PATCH 02/12] IB/cma: pass the port number to ib_create_qp Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:41:47 -0500 Message-ID: <01a901d19a73$82ad7f60$88087e20$@opengridcomputing.com> References: <1460410360-13104-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <1460410360-13104-3-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <20160419031425.GB27515@rhel.amr.corp.intel.com> <20160419173032.GD20844@obsidianresearch.com> <57167D9F.9060808@grimberg.me> <20160419192430.GB27028@obsidianresearch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160419192430.GB27028-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> Content-Language: en-us Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: 'Jason Gunthorpe' , 'Sagi Grimberg' Cc: 'Ira Weiny' , 'Christoph Hellwig' , dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, bart.vanassche-XdAiOPVOjttBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org, linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, target-devel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 09:49:03PM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > > > > >>>The new RW API will need this. > > >>> > > >>>Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig > > >>>Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche > > >>>Tested-by: Steve Wise > > >> > > >>I'm not opposed to this change but traditionally QPs are bound to a > > >>device not to a single port. > > > > > >Right, this was done because rdma_protocol_iwarp takes a port number. > > > > > >I think we discussed this once, the core code doesn't actually support > > >different protocols on different ports, so the port_num argument to > > >rdma_protocol_iwarp is redundant. > > > > > >This all starts to look really goofy when multi-port APM is used and > > >the QP's port number changes dynamically at runtime. (I have some > > >experimental patches that do that), I'd rather see all the port_num > > >stuff in this series go away. :( > > > > HCH and I complained about this per-port distinction in several private > > conversations. I'd really love to see it go away too. > > I'm in support of eliminating them. One protocol per device. > Ditto. > IB APM hard requires those semantics, and that reflects the reality of > all the drivers today. > > Nothing more is required than sending a patch, IHMO.. > I've been trying to sift through the original threads regarding rdma_protocol_iwarp() and friends. I couldn't find anybody advocating hard that the protocol/transport type should be per port. I think this thread has Doug stating it really should be per-device and static. Doug, correct me if I'm wrong... https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/10/612 Steve. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html