RE: [PATCH rdma-next 0/3] Support out of order data placement

Parav Pandit
2017-06-12T22:00:40Z

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Gunthorpe [mailto:jgunthorpe-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org]
> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 4:58 PM
> To: Parav Pandit <parav-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
> Cc: Steve Wise <swise-7bPotxP6k4+P2YhJcF5u+vpXobYPEAuW@public.gmane.org>; 'Hefty, Sean'
> <sean.hefty-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>; 'Dalessandro, Dennis'
> <dennis.dalessandro-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>; 'Leon Romanovsky' <leon-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>;
> 'Doug Ledford' <dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>; linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org; Idan
> Burstein <idanb-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next 0/3] Support out of order data placement
>
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 09:53:55PM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > I will add following more details to Documentation.
> > 1. Mention about pcie relax ordering - Barts point 2. Include
> > responder side table like Table 79 to crisply describe all cases and
> > ordering with respect to send and other messages 3. Also indicate that
> C9-28 is relaxed when ooo is enabled on a QP as a description to new
> responder side table.
> > This was offline comment that I received.
> > 4. Provide examples that Steve and Jason highlighted, with multiple writes
> to same memory location.
> > 5. Reiterate table 79, to make it clear that what doesn't change, or
> changes.
> > Let me know if you want to see any more details.
>
> Explain why this needs to be negotiated and what it does to the transmit
> side of a QP.
>
Sure. I will add this. This is important point.

> Jason