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 485B5C636D3 for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 21:12:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231126AbjA3VMD (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2023 16:12:03 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37976 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230377AbjA3VLe (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2023 16:11:34 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D476B4954A; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 13:11:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098416.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 30UKxTWk009590; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 21:10:52 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : date : mime-version : subject : to : cc : references : from : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=HcjlVfrOv1ufsjNoGLMxRHYLBsqf1L3B/faZdAmMXaY=; b=UJzE5ZCwp0JGry9CEfeyRJjaAQh9swPy3C4Ek/qGqyXK2Pg9nsZA1BRkz7XPgud1xFXp iOc0yH4CCIfGblMTN3wfjFJ5iM5AadbKKQwJnQK8AoqjaD5wEilnzLCncNONdE/xGmXv 6Zxba80/q2Jzdm8AQfp49PL8ubAHwe8+vvwxjPoAJqwo7gBsqzYmo24Mr/9J0pJP1FOC Gp5rjFBMQnND+ayRVLTQ0FlK01L39LSlap3jZkKeKKLgInxQ808kA06QBRpKVXPVhhjl q1C0P1u2x1YiTC3yodOQaaVW+aZJFTV9Q9cplkPH+/gPgWbF3NkgQcm+WhE4dNo8GEMS tQ== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3nemrg157y-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 30 Jan 2023 21:10:52 +0000 Received: from m0098416.ppops.net (m0098416.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 30UL0Rvx016077; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 21:10:51 GMT Received: from ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com (1b.90.2fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.47.144.27]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3nemrg157j-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 30 Jan 2023 21:10:51 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 30UJWLG0012312; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 21:10:51 GMT Received: from smtprelay02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com ([9.208.129.120]) by ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3ncvvdcp3f-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 30 Jan 2023 21:10:51 +0000 Received: from smtpav02.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav02.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [10.241.53.101]) by smtprelay02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 30ULAnDR66847042 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 30 Jan 2023 21:10:49 GMT Received: from smtpav02.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D6FE58066; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 21:10:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav02.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FB8958051; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 21:10:47 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.163.16.35] (unknown [9.163.16.35]) by smtpav02.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 21:10:47 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 22:10:46 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 1/7] net/smc: remove locks smc_client_lgr_pending and smc_server_lgr_pending To: "D. Wythe" , jaka@linux.ibm.com, kgraul@linux.ibm.com Cc: kuba@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org References: <1669453422-38152-1-git-send-email-alibuda@linux.alibaba.com> <1669453422-38152-2-git-send-email-alibuda@linux.alibaba.com> <2ad147d3-b127-b192-c2a5-29fa704cf3a1@linux.alibaba.com> From: Wenjia Zhang In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: n1XjYMCVW_uU6JsafQeuCXCPeHojcDBw X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 0v031njaaQJCNngYou4n-33jtcJZ3274 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.219,Aquarius:18.0.930,Hydra:6.0.562,FMLib:17.11.122.1 definitions=2023-01-30_17,2023-01-30_01,2022-06-22_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1015 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2212070000 definitions=main-2301300197 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 30.01.23 11:51, D. Wythe wrote: > > > On 1/30/23 4:37 PM, Wenjia Zhang wrote: >> >> >> On 29.01.23 16:11, D. Wythe wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 11/26/22 5:03 PM, D.Wythe wrote: >>>> From: "D. Wythe" >>>> >>>> This patch attempts to remove locks named smc_client_lgr_pending and >>>> smc_server_lgr_pending, which aim to serialize the creation of link >>>> group. However, once link group existed already, those locks are >>>> meaningless, worse still, they make incoming connections have to be >>>> queued one after the other. >>>> >>>> Now, the creation of link group is no longer generated by competition, >>>> but allocated through following strategy. >>>> >>> >>> >>> Hi, all >>> >>> I have noticed that there may be some difficulties in the advancement >>> of this series of patches. >>> I guess the main problem is to try remove the global lock in this >>> patch, the risks of removing locks >>> do harm to SMC-D, at the same time, this patch of removing locks is >>> also a little too complex. >>> >>> So, I am considering that we can temporarily delay the advancement of >>> this patch. We can works on >>> other patches first. Other patches are either simple enough or have >>> no obvious impact on SMC-D. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Best wishes. >>> D. Wythe >>> >>> >> Hi D. Wythe, >> >> that sounds good. Thank you for your consideration about SMC-D! > > Hi Wenjia, > > Thanks for your reply. > >> Removing locks is indeed a big issue, those patches make us difficult >> to accept without thoroughly testing in every corner. >> >> Best >> Wenjia > > What do you mean by those patches? My plan is to delete the first patch > in this series, > that is, 'remove locks smc_client_lgr_pending and > smc_server_lgr_pending', while other patches > should be retained. > > They has almost nothing impact on SMC-D or simple enough to be tested. > If you agree with this, > I can then issue the next version as soon as possible to remove the > first patch, and I think > we can quickly promote those patches. > > Thanks. > Wenjia > Except for the removing locks of smc_client_lgr_pending and smc_server_lgr_pending, I'm still not that sure if running SMC_LLC_FLOW_RKEY concurrently could make the communication between our Linux and z/OS broken, that we can not test currently, though I really like this idea. Sure, you can send the next version, I'll find a way to verify it. > > >