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=-6.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no 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 40970C432BE for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 18:12:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2922460238 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 18:12:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229716AbhG0SMf (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jul 2021 14:12:35 -0400 Received: from mail-dm3nam07on2045.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([40.107.95.45]:7425 "EHLO NAM02-DM3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230435AbhG0SMe (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jul 2021 14:12:34 -0400 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Vyv2SosNk9n0kGZ3XiGM/Tc1303w3zWnb3HawF6Kyng7/x4Ry9QzjaLycD81oOCYJrjdDaK53F0MoQJZk1Q4C2NXdYxjjAHEzUrpW+DtAuNeFQ/lgkhHRC3hv0ufM9/pVMgCrwginWe3L9tc+XOM1dwsPlZTLZY8o7y4usuNWXtH3DgUDUfmz66Zkuvz+j21o4guAJWTuL2GmAnHRRTKEs470POO8gPWIzhOoFmdV0t+K2UCBaBDrqbUtcui8eP819RlioKLAi2oN3+f1t6qBS+UhA2vpbi2lfASWeCbQk5fDWQTaz/grGZPYG3ROClPOZQOqobQTaOVW11qt1h1dg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=ylAgVCk+xDpUHPFs9mf1J92exo3xKAB70qiUbpRLsrQ=; b=Cgigg7mSCyCFW1G/K1VCXVuSxGM5g+9SlZT5WW4yNDW6EYvF5m5S4Zm9L6w2mMdBreM3L4nDGhl/hrwKtqw9eyd8+5udLEkMRXBAxSs/JvcEekPF9w3eaAMRv6VCkUNzLsSI6elO73cMJ44sainDt7efSY1xCf2KfNHVlEmglWCFLLcgpj/qxNniBv8F8IAyCJY40m/Oyziosq83qj2aWrteepGnTOcZIN0WNLR9krjh+TsVKoPev4QS/Hu+uBLivKVfvspRC6xm/TFlY/RvOWwck7jD1q8H0lGRM7ECTOX76Wi0tSF+OAyiNw1ABzaKDISOOm6u+jVtXrFrEdE0Kw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass (sender ip is 216.228.112.34) smtp.rcpttodomain=vger.kernel.org smtp.mailfrom=nvidia.com; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine sp=none pct=100) action=none header.from=nvidia.com; dkim=none (message not signed); arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=Nvidia.com; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=ylAgVCk+xDpUHPFs9mf1J92exo3xKAB70qiUbpRLsrQ=; b=FHlqtjL77w7n+wu6tFzUJMyBgGQooZFSFqo0sj6PamxlG3NgTTZScNzIHNuUQ1alwHSlvccHJ8Zv3uavtDQwkS+T0HiIgtbgTtMI9wwdv1oDH8MWGYyAK6Rym5GPWSkepMNkbLiRxROyriqb3hYgYydsbxEqqu0nZ1mgv1H9j3ba7qB2UE5Q/r/B/Mp1aWMdvRysGf7t4j4kfaQgtSywIY+6/c73pIaO2EuHmsaBptPWpwhGAUcR/fXDmuJsbZO6Lss0a80i6ofjY7Hhr33xqRL7BfMvBM4U8e63ti0KpqZuH5MHGiwmo3QDCEwH0fu1dXlsdshMSl3U4u1poHd+nQ== Received: from BN8PR07CA0007.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:408:ac::20) by BN8PR12MB3633.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:408:49::28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4352.29; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 18:12:32 +0000 Received: from BN8NAM11FT045.eop-nam11.prod.protection.outlook.com (2603:10b6:408:ac:cafe::94) by BN8PR07CA0007.outlook.office365.com (2603:10b6:408:ac::20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4352.26 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 18:12:32 +0000 X-MS-Exchange-Authentication-Results: spf=pass (sender IP is 216.228.112.34) smtp.mailfrom=nvidia.com; vger.kernel.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nvidia.com; Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of nvidia.com designates 216.228.112.34 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com; client-ip=216.228.112.34; helo=mail.nvidia.com; Received: from mail.nvidia.com (216.228.112.34) by BN8NAM11FT045.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.13.177.47) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.20.4352.24 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 18:12:32 +0000 Received: from localhost (172.20.187.5) by HQMAIL107.nvidia.com (172.20.187.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 18:12:31 +0000 Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2021 21:12:26 +0300 From: Leon Romanovsky To: Jason Gunthorpe CC: "Marciniszyn, Mike" , "Chuck Lever III" , Haakon Bugge , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , "Dalessandro, Dennis" , Doug Ledford Subject: Re: NFS RDMA test failure as of 5.14-rc1 Message-ID: References: <20210727173857.GI1721383@nvidia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210727173857.GI1721383@nvidia.com> X-Originating-IP: [172.20.187.5] X-ClientProxiedBy: HQMAIL111.nvidia.com (172.20.187.18) To HQMAIL107.nvidia.com (172.20.187.13) X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0 X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 35f27bf5-fbfb-4225-210b-08d9512a1a7b X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: BN8PR12MB3633: X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:10000; X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1 X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-Relay: 0 X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0; X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: 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 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:216.228.112.34;CTRY:US;LANG:en;SCL:1;SRV:;IPV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;H:mail.nvidia.com;PTR:schybrid03.nvidia.com;CAT:NONE;SFS:(7916004)(4636009)(346002)(396003)(376002)(136003)(39860400002)(46966006)(36840700001)(6636002)(478600001)(356005)(9686003)(53546011)(336012)(8936002)(8676002)(86362001)(316002)(36906005)(5660300002)(47076005)(6862004)(33716001)(426003)(6666004)(16526019)(70586007)(82740400003)(4326008)(82310400003)(36860700001)(70206006)(2906002)(26005)(54906003)(7636003)(186003);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101; X-OriginatorOrg: Nvidia.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Jul 2021 18:12:32.2740 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 35f27bf5-fbfb-4225-210b-08d9512a1a7b X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a;Ip=[216.228.112.34];Helo=[mail.nvidia.com] X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BN8NAM11FT045.eop-nam11.prod.protection.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN8PR12MB3633 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 02:38:57PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 05:35:46PM +0000, Marciniszyn, Mike wrote: > > > > On Jul 27, 2021, at 1:14 PM, Marciniszyn, Mike > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I suspect the patch needs to be reverted or NFS RDMA needs to handle > > > >> the transition to INIT? > > > > > > If I'm reading nvmet_rdma_create_queue_ib() correctly, it invokes > > > rdma_create_qp() then posts Receives. No > > > ib_modify_qp() there. > > > > > > So some ULPs assume that rdma_create_qp() returns a new QP in the > > > IB_QPS_INIT state. > > > > > > I can't say whether that is spec compliant or even internally documented. > > > > > > > This from the spec: > > > > C10-20: A newly created QP/EE shall be placed in the Reset state. > > rdma_create_qp() is a CM function, it is not covered by the spec. > > The question is if there is any reasonable basis for ULPs to require > that the QP be in the INIT state after the CM creates it, or if the > ULPs should wait to post their recvs until later on in the process. > > Haakon's original analysis said that this was an INIT->INIT > transition, so I'm a bit confused why we lost a RESET->INIT transition > in the end? When I reviewed Haakon's patch, I saw that all accept/listen/e.t.c. events modify QP from RESET to INIT. This is how we lost extra transition. Thanks > > Jason