From: Roland Dreier <roland@kernel.org>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] More sane neigh infrastructure
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 09:34:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAG4TOxOv1WsgfRXxrBWWq-+9ee3apEE0B_Onn+JB=tEEuOhhxg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110725.030109.1723861338142084129.davem@davemloft.net>
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 3:01 AM, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> Devices provide up to three things:
>
> 1) netdev->neighpriv_len, length of per-neighbour device private
> state, accessible via neighbour_priv(neigh)
>
> 2) net_device_ops->ndo_neigh_construct(), invoked right after
> neigh_tbl->constructor(), can fail
Hey Dave,
I'll definitely look at converting IPoIB over to using this stuff.
Would love to get rid of all the dicy handling of ipoib_neigh lifetime
that we currently have. However, I have a question about what the
intention for ndo_neigh_construct() is in the IPoIB case.
As we talked about, IPoIB has to trigger a path lookup to the subnet
manager (SM) when it gets a remote port ID. However the SM is a
remote entity, so this lookup means we send a message and then
asynchronously wait for it to complete (or possibly timeout), just
like the ARP itself. But this is done after we get the port ID via
normal RFC 826 ARP (with an address format as specified by RFC 4391).
So I don't think we can use custom neigh_ops with a new solict method
the way clip does -- we actually want to let the normal stack do ARP
or ND, but then extend the process by another message/response step.
I'm sure this is possible within your scheme but I'm not sure I
understand what the "right" way is.
Thanks!
Roland
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-25 16:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-25 10:01 [PATCH 0/7] More sane neigh infrastructure David Miller
2011-07-25 16:34 ` Roland Dreier [this message]
2011-07-25 21:10 ` David Miller
[not found] ` <20110725.141041.1092565620930748250.davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org>
2011-07-25 22:49 ` Roland Dreier
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAG4TOxOv1WsgfRXxrBWWq-+9ee3apEE0B_Onn+JB=tEEuOhhxg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=roland@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).