From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next 0/3] Support out of order data placement Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 11:32:21 -0600 Message-ID: <20170612173221.GA13302@obsidianresearch.com> References: <1497281280.2770.1.camel@wdc.com> <20170612162917.GA11993@obsidianresearch.com> <20170612164343.GA12435@obsidianresearch.com> <20170612165536.GB12435@obsidianresearch.com> <20170612171436.GA12739@obsidianresearch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Parav Pandit Cc: Bart Van Assche , "leon-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org" , "dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org" , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Idan Burstein List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 05:28:00PM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote: > > Exactly - all spec conformant ULPs are compatible with enabling this new > > function of mlx5. > This per QP attribute is for read and write both. So responder can receive out-of-order read responses. > And HCA's QP need to be told to accept it that way, which by default doesn't. I think this one flag is conflating too many things then. Obviously sending out of order packets is not spec conformant, and I don't think your discussion is clear enough, as this change to send side certainly was not clear to me. I'm not excited about a new end-to-end flag without some kind of negotiation scheme, and I'm not excited about this being in any of the common APIs. Perhaps it should be in libmlx5 instead. Jason -- 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