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=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 44DD1C3A59E for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 12:16:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20E0122D6D for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 12:16:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728125AbfHUMQB (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Aug 2019 08:16:01 -0400 Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:12626 "EHLO mga04.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727953AbfHUMQB (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Aug 2019 08:16:01 -0400 X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Aug 2019 05:15:59 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,412,1559545200"; d="scan'208";a="378119052" Received: from jerryopenix.sh.intel.com (HELO jerryopenix) ([10.239.158.171]) by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Aug 2019 05:16:00 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 20:14:36 +0800 From: "Liu, Changcheng" To: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Subject: why ibv_wc src_qp is zero Message-ID: <20190821121436.GA1834@jerryopenix> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-rdma-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Hi all, Does anyone know the usage of the src_qp field in struct ibv_wc? I’m using RC transport type with only Send Operation on Send Queue. On the requester side, when SQ WR is finished, there’s one WCE is on CQ. ibv_wc::src_qp is checked with zero value. On the responder side, when RQ WR is finished, there’s one WCE is on CQ. ibv_wc::src_qp is checked with zero value too. Why the ibv_wc::src_qp field is zero instead of recording the peer's qp number? --Thanks Changcheng