Re: [PATCH v3 13/13] cxgbit: add files for cxgbit.ko

[Varun Prakash <varun@chelsio.com>]

Hi Or, Nicholas and Steve

Thank you for the feedback and apologies for the delay in my response.

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 09:55:04PM -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-05-25 at 23:41 +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 8:40 PM, Steve Wise <swise@opengridcomputing.com> wrote:
> > >> From: Or Gerlitz [mailto:gerlitz.or@gmail.com]
> > >>
> 
> <SNIP>
> 
> > > > So refactor would be
> > > common services that iw_cxgb4, cxgbi4, and cxgbit all use.    An example
> > > would be: iw_cxgb4/cm.c:send_connect(), and cxgb4i.c/send_act_open_req().
> > 
> > good and one code base which treats both sides.
> > 
> > > I didn't look at LRO at this point.
> > >
> > > Anyway, none of these are particularly difficult, but will require
> > > significant effort and time.  The current cxgbit series has had a lot of
> > > internal review and testing by the Chelsio iscsi team, and it would be great
> > > if this refactoring can be deferred with the promise that we will get it
> > > done for the 4.8 merge window.  Thoughts?
> > 
> > We've been there, e.g Intel recently sent iWARP driver and throughout
> > the review we realized that lots of the iwarp netlink code is shared
> > between existing drivers and the new driver, so the driver didn't get
> > in kernel X but rather X+1 after doing that fix, it's only off by
> > one...
> > 
> > I don't think we should be letting duplication of that extent to get
> > in, for Chelsio ppl that know the materials well better vs anyone else
> > it should have been clear that they create that dup without any real
> > justification and till  that moment they didn't come here to even
> > comment on that. Lets have them fix that for the next merge window,
> > that's my thinking, Nic?
> > 
> 
> Varun + Co have made common improvements between existing software
> iscsi-target RX + TX PDU handling and their new driver, and no further
> comments for these prerequisites have been made.
> 
> The additional improvements discussed here so far are cxgb* specific,
> and will not effect other drivers, and will not change configfs user ABI
> layout compatibility within /sys/kernel/config/target/iscsi/.
> 
> That being the case, I think it's a reasonable starting point for
> mainline users to consume target ISO on cxgb hardware, and for Chelsio
> to make further common code improvements across their existing host
> drivers.

I agree that we can refactor initiator, target and iwarp drivers to
reduce code duplication as Steve has mentioned. We will work on this for
4.8 merge window.

Regards,
Varun