From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael R. Hines" Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] rdma: add a new IB_ACCESS_GIFT flag Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 16:54:39 -0400 Message-ID: <515F3A0F.5030507@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20130324155153.GA8597@redhat.com> <515F3160.4020007@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Roland Dreier Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Jason Gunthorpe , Sean Hefty , Hal Rosenstock , Yishai Hadas , Christoph Lameter , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , LKML , qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org To be more specific, here's what I did: 1. apply kernel module patch - re-insert module 1. QEMU does: ibv_reg_mr(........IBV_ACCESS_GIFT | IBV_ACCESS_REMOTE_READ) 2. Start the RDMA migration 3. Migration completes without any errors This test does *not* work with a cgroup swap limit, however. The process gets killed. (Both with and without GIFT) - Michael On 04/05/2013 04:43 PM, Roland Dreier wrote: > On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Michael R. Hines > wrote: >> I also removed the IBV_*_WRITE flags on the sender-side and activated >> cgroups with the "memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes" activated and the migration >> with RDMA also succeeded without any problems (both with *and* without GIFT >> also worked). > Not sure I'm interpreting this correctly. Are you saying that things > worked without actually setting the GIFT flag? In which case why are > we adding this flag? > > - R. >