From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/16] NFS/RDMA patches proposed for 4.1 Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 08:44:11 -0700 Message-ID: <20150505154411.GA16729@infradead.org> References: <20150313211124.22471.14517.stgit@manet.1015granger.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150313211124.22471.14517.stgit-FYjufvaPoItvLzlybtyyYzGyq/o6K9yX@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Chuck Lever Cc: linux-nfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 05:21:17PM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > This is a series of client-side patches for NFS/RDMA. In preparation > for increasing the transport credit limit and maximum rsize/wsize, > I've re-factored the memory registration logic into separate files, > invoked via a method API. Just curious if you ever though of moving this into the generic rdma layer? I've been working on a rdma based storage driver recently, and the various different memory registration methods are a complete pain in the ass, and impossible to test in and ULD without havin access to all kinds of different hardware. And from I see we litterly dont use them much different from the generic dma mapping API helpers (at a very high level) so it seems it should be easy to move a slightly expanded version of your API to the core code. -- 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