Re: [PATCH V1 for-next 1/2] IB/core: Report LSO capabilities when querying device

[Leon Romanovsky <leon-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1726 bytes --]

On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 02:05:07PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 07:11:23PM +0000, Hefty, Sean wrote:
> > > > An IBTA process? How would that be relevant here?
> > > 
> > > What do you mean? IBTA is the only multi-vendor body left working on
> > > standardizing the hardware specification for verbs.
> > > 
> > > These various recent patches are adding new hardware features to
> > > verbs.
> > > 
> > > If you want hardware knowledgeable people to help, then you need to go
> > > to the forums they are active in.
> > > 
> > > This isn't just a software exercise.
> > 
> > Previous changes to the uABI (for example, XRC) were not accepted
> > until they were standardized by the IBTA.  An exception that I'm
> > aware of are the flow specs.
> 
> We need to decide as a community what we want to do here, because this
> uncertain process is getting tiring for everyone.
> 
> The Collab Summit discussions ended with a general consensus that some
> things would go to the driver-specific channel, while hardware
> behavior related to the common uAPI would go through at least a
> multi-vendor sign off process - like IBTA.

Jason,
We did ALL and much more from the discussed for RSS patches and at the end,
we saw half a word from the maintainer about the future plans for its acceptance.

> 
> We didn't talk about how to expose them to apps in userspace once they
> were exposed through the kernel.
> 
> It is pretty obvious the current 'process' isn't working.

There is no meaning of "process" without people and their execution, and right
now, I don't see any execution of it in the linux RDMA community (fixes
and ULP changes are not merged for a while).

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]