From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sagi Grimberg Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next 08/10] iser-target: Support the remote invalidation exception Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 12:16:45 +0200 Message-ID: <564AFE8D.5040209@dev.mellanox.co.il> References: <1447691861-3796-1-git-send-email-sagig@mellanox.com> <1447691861-3796-9-git-send-email-sagig@mellanox.com> <564AE0C6.2030203@mellanox.com> <564AF857.5090701@dev.mellanox.co.il> <20151117101444.GA2569@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20151117101444.GA2569@infradead.org> Sender: target-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Or Gerlitz , Sagi Grimberg , linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, target-devel@vger.kernel.org, "Nicholas A. Bellinger" , Steve Wise , Jenny Derzhavetz List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 17/11/2015 12:14, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:50:15AM +0200, Sagi Grimberg wrote: >> >> >> On 17/11/2015 10:09, Or Gerlitz wrote: >>> On 11/16/2015 6:37 PM, Sagi Grimberg wrote: >>>> We'll use remote invalidate, according to negotiation result >>>> during connection establishment. If the initiator declared that >>>> it supports the remote invalidate exception then the target will >>>> use IB_WR_SEND_WITH_INV with the correct rkey for the response. >>> >>> same comment as the one I posted for the initiator patch, check for >>> IB_DEVICE_MEM_MGT_EXTENSIONS >> >> SEND_WITH_INV doesn't have anything to do with >> IB_DEVICE_MEM_MGT_EXTENSIONS does it? What is the relations between >> the device capability to do FRWR and invalidating a remote rkey? > > Both FRs and SEND_WITH_INV are part of the base memory management > extensions and also required for iWarp. Thanks for clarifying. I'll add the check.