From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Or Gerlitz Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next 6/7] IB/mlx4: Create and use another QP1 for RoCEv2 Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 16:42:12 +0200 Message-ID: <56829BC4.2070709@mellanox.com> References: <1451395447-5198-1-git-send-email-matanb@mellanox.com> <1451395447-5198-7-git-send-email-matanb@mellanox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1451395447-5198-7-git-send-email-matanb-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Matan Barak , Moni Shoua Cc: Doug Ledford , linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Yishai Hadas , Majd Dibbiny List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 12/29/2015 3:24 PM, Matan Barak wrote: > The mlx4 driver uses a special QP to implement the GSI QP. This kind > of QP allows to build the InfiniBand headers in SW to be put before > the payload that comes in with the WR. The mlx4 HW builds the packet, > calculates the ICRC and puts it at the end of the payload. This ICRC > calculation however depends on the QP configuration which is > determined when QP is modified (roce_mode during INIT->RTR). > On the other hand, ICRC verification when packet is received does to > depend on this configuration. I don't understand the part of the sentence saying "when packet is received does to depend on this configuration" maybe some typo/s there? > Therefore, using 2 GSI QPs for send (one for each RoCE version) and 1 > GSI QP for receive are required. s/2/two/ and s/1/one/ please Or. -- 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