From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88BCBC433E6 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 01:22:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5540B60C41 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 01:22:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229885AbhA2BW0 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jan 2021 20:22:26 -0500 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.187]:4593 "EHLO szxga01-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229757AbhA2BWT (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jan 2021 20:22:19 -0500 Received: from DGGEMM405-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.53]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4DRffP08kkzY3sC; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 09:20:29 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggema751-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.198.193) by DGGEMM405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.20.213) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.498.0; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 09:21:35 +0800 Received: from dggema753-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.198.195) by dggema751-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.198.193) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2106.2; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 09:21:35 +0800 Received: from dggema753-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.9.48.84]) by dggema753-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.9.48.84]) with mapi id 15.01.2106.002; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 09:21:35 +0800 From: liweihang To: Jason Gunthorpe CC: "dledford@redhat.com" , "leon@kernel.org" , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , "linuxarm@openeuler.org" Subject: Re: Question about the mechanism of RoCEv2 VLAN validation Thread-Topic: Question about the mechanism of RoCEv2 VLAN validation Thread-Index: AQHW9X8IxKfQwUKiHkePfWN8w4hMZA== Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 01:21:35 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20210128141136.GF4247@nvidia.com> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.67.100.165] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 2021/1/28 22:12, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 02:08:21PM +0000, liweihang wrote: > >> UD is connectionless-oriented, an UD QP won't record VLAN info in it's QPC, >> so how to achieve the checking mechanism? Or a UD QP should just ignore the >> unmatched VLAN ID? > > Right, UD QPs recieve all packets for the entire device that match the > UD QPN > > They indirectly report the incoming gid table index they were matched > with in the completion and the first 40 bytes > > If an app only wants to look at certain gid table entries then it is > up to the app to filter > > Jason > Thank you, Jason. It's really helpful. Weihang