From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753614AbcAGUt2 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 7 Jan 2016 15:49:28 -0500
Received: from mail-yk0-f169.google.com ([209.85.160.169]:34390 "EHLO
	mail-yk0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753545AbcAGUtX (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 7 Jan 2016 15:49:23 -0500
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 15:49:21 -0500
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Parav Pandit <pandit.parav@gmail.com>
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org,
        lizefan@huawei.com, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>, Liran Liss <liranl@mellanox.com>,
        "Hefty, Sean" <sean.hefty@intel.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com>,
        Haggai Eran <haggaie@mellanox.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        james.l.morris@oracle.com, serge@hallyn.com,
        Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@mellanox.com>, Matan Barak <matanb@mellanox.com>,
        raindel@mellanox.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv1 0/6] rdma controller support
Message-ID: <20160107204921.GI1898@mtj.duckdns.org>
References: <1452020286-9508-1-git-send-email-pandit.parav@gmail.com>
 <20160105215623.GH5995@mtj.duckdns.org>
 <CAG53R5XQaUz=vJCEqLwGt93CC1YMnVQ=k4DuRU0nspcb_-+_6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160107150718.GC29797@mtj.duckdns.org>
 <CAG53R5WwdRwb0XyAMGMey4JaDGUntJ9=m_ZToFkygboZxfMQ6A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160107200604.GE1898@mtj.duckdns.org>
 <CAG53R5Xy8avVVvfGjgYOJSVRNFOHpiHXrQeEeb41EP4hy370QQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160107203425.GG1898@mtj.duckdns.org>
 <CAG53R5V80hY2SLrt3-GNeQ-wr+0aFM7sNJLvUGuy70t5dc8yOA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAG53R5V80hY2SLrt3-GNeQ-wr+0aFM7sNJLvUGuy70t5dc8yOA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hello, Parav.

On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 02:16:59AM +0530, Parav Pandit wrote:
> Let me think through it. Its been late night for me currently. So dont
> want to conclude in hurry.

Sure thing.

> At high level it looks doable by maintaining hash table head on per
> device basis, that further reduces hash contention by one level.
> I will get back on this tomorrow.

Hmmm... why would it need a hash table?  Let's say there's a struct
rdma_device for each rdma_device and then that stuct can simply have
rdma_device->res_table[] or whatever to track limits and consumptions
and rdma_device->res_enabled mask to tell which resources are enabled
on the device.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun