RE: [RFC PATCH 1/5] IB/core: Add Core Capability flags to ib_device

Weiny, Ira
2015-05-12T02:13:53Z

>
> On May 10, 2015, at 11:42 PM, ira.weiny <ira.weiny-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 08:22:21PM +0000, Dave Goodell (dgoodell) wrote:
> >>
> >> In the case that usNIC is operating in UDP mode (which is the overwhelming
> majority of the cases), there is absolutely no additional protocol that ends up on
> the wire or headers in the user buffers besides UDP/IP/Ethernet. They are
> 100% plain UDP packets, they just happen to be sent via OS-bypass queues
> instead of traveling through the kernel networking stack.
> >>
> >> [^^^^^ there continues to be confusion about this for some reason, but I
> don't know why]
> >
> > So what is this patch for?
>
> Does my earlier email clarify the situation any? http://marc.info/?l=linux-
> rdma&m=142972178630720&w=2

Somewhat, is there any reason applications need to distinguish between the " The legacy RDMA_TRANSPORT_USNIC type" and " The current RDMA_TRANSPORT_USNIC_UDP type"?

Or does the former no longer exist?

>
> > commit 248567f79304b953ea492fb92ade097b62ed09b2
> > Author: Upinder Malhi <umalhi-FYB4Gu1CFyUAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
> > Date: Thu Jan 9 14:48:19 2014 -0800
> >
> > IB/core: Add RDMA_TRANSPORT_USNIC_UDP
> >
> > Add RDMA_TRANSPORT_USNIC_UDP which will be used by usNIC.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Upinder Malhi <umalhi-FYB4Gu1CFyUAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Roland Dreier <roland-BHEL68pLQRGGvPXPguhicg@public.gmane.org>
> >
> > This is probably where a lot of the confusion is coming from.
>
> Arguably RDMA_TRANSPORT_USNIC_UDP could/should have simply been
> named RDMA_TRANSPORT_UDP.

I guess I'm wondering if there needs to be an RDMA_TRANSPORT_USNIC to represent the " The legacy RDMA_TRANSPORT_USNIC type" you mention in the link above.

Ira