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=-8.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 A01B2C433DB for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 07:57:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6253164EAA for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 07:57:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229601AbhBIH5e convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Feb 2021 02:57:34 -0500 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.187]:4616 "EHLO szxga01-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229690AbhBIH5c (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Feb 2021 02:57:32 -0500 Received: from DGGEMM405-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.53]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4DZZvB0tv7zY782; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 15:55:34 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggema751-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.198.193) by DGGEMM405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.20.213) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.498.0; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 15:56:49 +0800 Received: from dggema753-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.198.195) by dggema751-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.198.193) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2106.2; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 15:56:49 +0800 Received: from dggema753-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.9.48.84]) by dggema753-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.9.48.84]) with mapi id 15.01.2106.006; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 15:56:48 +0800 From: liweihang To: Jason Gunthorpe CC: "dledford@redhat.com" , "leon@kernel.org" , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , "linuxarm@openeuler.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next 05/12] RDMA/hns: Adjust definition of FRMR fields Thread-Topic: [PATCH for-next 05/12] RDMA/hns: Adjust definition of FRMR fields Thread-Index: AQHW+6Pkhjju0EYvxk+CH6ulVXL1wQ== Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2021 07:56:48 +0000 Message-ID: <46d3f3d647744440aecb0b333975c7cb@huawei.com> References: <1612517974-31867-1-git-send-email-liweihang@huawei.com> <1612517974-31867-6-git-send-email-liweihang@huawei.com> <20210209002327.GA1233507@nvidia.com> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.67.100.165] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 2021/2/9 8:24, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 05:39:27PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote: >> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.h b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.h >> index f29438c..1da980c 100644 >> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.h >> @@ -1255,15 +1255,15 @@ struct hns_roce_v2_rc_send_wqe { >> >> #define V2_RC_SEND_WQE_BYTE_4_INLINE_S 12 >> >> -#define V2_RC_FRMR_WQE_BYTE_4_BIND_EN_S 19 >> +#define V2_RC_FRMR_WQE_BYTE_40_BIND_EN_S 10 >> >> -#define V2_RC_FRMR_WQE_BYTE_4_ATOMIC_S 20 >> +#define V2_RC_FRMR_WQE_BYTE_40_ATOMIC_S 11 >> >> -#define V2_RC_FRMR_WQE_BYTE_4_RR_S 21 >> +#define V2_RC_FRMR_WQE_BYTE_40_RR_S 12 >> >> -#define V2_RC_FRMR_WQE_BYTE_4_RW_S 22 >> +#define V2_RC_FRMR_WQE_BYTE_40_RW_S 13 >> >> -#define V2_RC_FRMR_WQE_BYTE_4_LW_S 23 >> +#define V2_RC_FRMR_WQE_BYTE_40_LW_S 14 >> >> #define V2_RC_SEND_WQE_BYTE_4_FLAG_S 31 >> >> @@ -1280,7 +1280,7 @@ struct hns_roce_v2_rc_send_wqe { >> >> struct hns_roce_wqe_frmr_seg { >> __le32 pbl_size; >> - __le32 mode_buf_pg_sz; >> + __le32 byte_40; >> }; > > This stuff is HW API isn't it? > > I didn't see anything to negotiate compatability with existing HW? > What happens if the kernel is updated and run on old HW/FW? > > If you tightly couple you still need to check and refuse to load the > driver. > > Jason > Thank you, FRMR is not well-supported on HIP08, so we re-design it on HIP09. I will add a check to avoid ULPs using FRMR on HIP08. Weihang