From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/27] IB/Verbs: Reform cm related part in IB-core cma/ucm Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 17:22:38 +0200 Message-ID: <552FD3BE.4090204@profitbricks.com> References: <552F6CF2.4000606@profitbricks.com> <552F6DEA.9080701@profitbricks.com> <552FB4D0.5080302@dev.mellanox.co.il> <552FB6EF.80107@profitbricks.com> <1828884A29C6694DAF28B7E6B8A82373A8FC22C3@ORSMSX109.amr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1828884A29C6694DAF28B7E6B8A82373A8FC22C3-P5GAC/sN6hkd3b2yrw5b5LfspsVTdybXVpNB7YpNyf8@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: "Hefty, Sean" , Hal Rosenstock Cc: Roland Dreier , Hal Rosenstock , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Tom Tucker , Steve Wise , Hoang-Nam Nguyen , Christoph Raisch , infinipath , Eli Cohen , "Latif, Faisal" , Jack Morgenstein , Or Gerlitz , Haggai Eran , "Weiny, Ira" , Tom Talpey , Jason Gunthorpe , Doug Ledford List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 04/16/2015 04:31 PM, Hefty, Sean wrote: >>> This is equivalent to today where the checks are per node rather than >>> per port. >>> >>> Should all checks here be port 1 based or only certain ones like listen >>> ? For example, in connect/reject/disconnect, don't we already have port >>> ? Guess this can be dealt with later as this is not a regression from >>> the current implementation. >> >> Yeah, these parts of cma may need more carve in future, like some new >> callback >> for different CM type as Sean suggested. >> >> Maybe directly using 1 could help to highlight the problem ;-) > > Only a few checks need to be per device. I think I pointed those out previously. Testing should show anywhere that we miss fairly quickly, since port would still be 0. For the checks that can be updated to be per port, I would rather go ahead and convert them. Got it, will be changed in next version :-) To be confirmed: PORT ASSIGNED rdma_init_qp_attr Y rdma_destroy_id unknown cma_listen_on_dev N cma_bind_loopback N rdma_listen N rdma_connect Y rdma_accept Y rdma_reject Y rdma_disconnect Y ib_ucm_add_one N Is this list correct? Regards, Michael Wang > > - Sean > -- 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