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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A7FCC4167E for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 09:54:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237352AbiBGJwv (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Feb 2022 04:52:51 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33450 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1351929AbiBGJhK (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Feb 2022 04:37:10 -0500 Received: from out30-132.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-132.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.132]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 532D1C043181; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 01:37:08 -0800 (PST) X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R671e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=e01e04400;MF=tonylu@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=8;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0V3q7Wgi_1644226624; Received: from localhost(mailfrom:tonylu@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0V3q7Wgi_1644226624) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(127.0.0.1); Mon, 07 Feb 2022 17:37:04 +0800 Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2022 17:37:03 +0800 From: Tony Lu To: "D. Wythe" Cc: kgraul@linux.ibm.com, kuba@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, matthieu.baerts@tessares.net Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 3/3] net/smc: Fallback when handshake workqueue congested Message-ID: Reply-To: Tony Lu References: <2d3f81193fc7a245c50b30329d0e84ae98427a33.1643380219.git.alibuda@linux.alibaba.com> <0c4902f4-e744-fe95-1a05-51ae936c4516@linux.alibaba.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0c4902f4-e744-fe95-1a05-51ae936c4516@linux.alibaba.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 07, 2022 at 03:13:22PM +0800, D. Wythe wrote: > > After some trial and thought, I found that the scope of netlink control is > too large, we should limit the scope to socket. Adding a socket option may > be a better choice, what do you think? > It is a good idea to be a socket-level config. Maybe we could consider netlink as default global behaviour. Thanks, Tony Lu