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 6CA26C4332F for ; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 14:52:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236380AbiA0Owj (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jan 2022 09:52:39 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:37658 "EHLO mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232186AbiA0Owj (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jan 2022 09:52:39 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 20REfxpQ032326; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 14:52:35 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=mRFU3LhMTNakaNyNk6PZuQkNJv1QO1+VwhJ3u88yBSs=; b=tZQpugbO3AovuHiBwZruecy7vKd/qCW8zbZxOIg9eMFrczKOd5X6n1MK8Z6lCoq9bdHo 2KYmKlYrQJfaGwko66CZAwI37tIJuAfsMOG/rQBeRbFXnAdtvi4iOPEL7+pykAfZu9Br C05cifwf0kGs03OhdIfO2PjkPaA3+azHLgxc64cr4dQ4Ad2hrzVypiKPxk2NctjFMELQ cmCNEuV0IXjT9+j3h2ibICtqAH9JkoMW/gKTIk2FGGZFMItShG17boyKkfkBEaJkqVQL nNN4YW0Nn0E6R+tNBsUkYhCNAiQiH7vICpat8+cO2ay8QCSG91v2GJNG9z2vo5T06yC/ NQ== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3duvh0sq5k-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 27 Jan 2022 14:52:35 +0000 Received: from m0098421.ppops.net (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 20REhWpU005920; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 14:52:34 GMT Received: from ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (63.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.99]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3duvh0sq55-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 27 Jan 2022 14:52:34 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 20REqXlt024520; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 14:52:33 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay11.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.196]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3dr9j9s73c-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 27 Jan 2022 14:52:32 +0000 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 20REqUb940763794 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 27 Jan 2022 14:52:30 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A0DD4C05E; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 14:52:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C6164C052; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 14:52:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.152.222.35] (unknown [9.152.222.35]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 14:52:29 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <3fcfdf75-eb8c-426d-5874-3afdc49de743@linux.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:52:36 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/6] net/smc: Spread workload over multiple cores Content-Language: en-US To: Tony Lu , Leon Romanovsky Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , kuba@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, RDMA mailing list References: <20220114054852.38058-1-tonylu@linux.alibaba.com> <20220126152806.GN8034@ziepe.ca> From: Karsten Graul Organization: IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: jkkOmHvkj0MAaZDp7B9Fbtk6pQ35qVmP X-Proofpoint-GUID: 3k3ObI87iqAxYE3vcI1Rfc740r466vAU X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.816,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.11.62.513 definitions=2022-01-27_03,2022-01-27_01,2021-12-02_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 lowpriorityscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2201110000 definitions=main-2201270088 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On 27/01/2022 10:50, Tony Lu wrote: > On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 11:25:41AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 05:14:35PM +0800, Tony Lu wrote: >>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 10:47:09AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: >>>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 03:59:36PM +0800, Tony Lu wrote: >>> >>> Sorry for that if I missed something about properly using existing >>> in-kernel API. I am not sure the proper API is to use ib_cq_pool_get() >>> and ib_cq_pool_put()? >>> >>> If so, these APIs doesn't suit for current smc's usage, I have to >>> refactor logic (tasklet and wr_id) in smc. I think it is a huge work >>> and should do it with full discussion. >> >> This discussion is not going anywhere. Just to summarize, we (Jason and I) >> are asking to use existing API, from the beginning. > > Yes, I can't agree more with you about using existing API and I have > tried them earlier. The existing APIs are easy to use if I wrote a new > logic. I also don't want to repeat the codes. > > The main obstacle is that the packet and wr processing of smc is > tightly bound to the old API and not easy to replace with existing API. > > To solve a real issue, I have to fix it based on the old API. If using > existing API in this patch, I have to refactor smc logics which needs > more time. Our production tree is synced with smc next. So I choose to > fix this issue first, then refactor these logic to fit existing API once > and for all. While I understand your approach to fix the issue first I need to say that such interim fixes create an significant amount of effort that has to be spent for review and test for others. And there is the increased risk to introduce new bugs by just this only-for-now fix. Given the fact that right now you are the only one who is affected by this problem I recommend to keep your fix in your environment for now, and come back with the final version. In the meantime I can use the saved time to review the bunch of other patches that we received. Thank you!