From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roland Dreier Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/2] Add support for enhanced atomic operations Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 07:53:35 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20100310155749.GA25964@vlad-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: In-Reply-To: (=?utf-8?Q?=22?= =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=A5kon?= Bugge"'s message of "Fri, 12 Mar 2010 10:21:57 +0100") Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=A5kon?= Bugge Cc: vlad-LDSdmyG8hGV8YrgS2mwiifqBs+8SCbDb@public.gmane.org, linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org > With the proposed patches in place, how do you know if masked atomics > are implemented or not? Guess apps need to know this information > already on todays HCAs. >>From the patch: > @@ -105,6 +105,7 @@ enum ib_device_cap_flags { > IB_DEVICE_UD_TSO = (1<<19), > IB_DEVICE_MEM_MGT_EXTENSIONS = (1<<21), > IB_DEVICE_BLOCK_MULTICAST_LOOPBACK = (1<<22), > + IB_DEVICE_MASKED_ATOMIC = (1<<23), > }; > Hence, I think it would be cleaner if a new capability, > masked_atomic_cap, were introduced, using the original definitions > (NONE, HCA, GLOB). Actually that does seem more orthogonal to me. -- Roland Dreier For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html -- 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