Netdev List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com
To: Gerd Rausch <gerd.rausch@oracle.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/7] net/rds: Wait for the FRMR_IS_FREE (or FRMR_IS_STALE) transition after posting IB_WR_LOCAL_INV
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 14:00:37 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b5669540-3892-9d79-85ba-79e96ddd3a81@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <01c251f4-c8f8-fcb8-bccc-341d4a3db90a@oracle.com>

On 7/1/19 1:55 PM, Gerd Rausch wrote:
> Hi Santosh,
> 
> On 01/07/2019 13.41, santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com wrote:
>>> @@ -144,7 +146,29 @@ static int rds_ib_post_reg_frmr(struct rds_ib_mr *ibmr)
>>>            if (printk_ratelimit())
>>>                pr_warn("RDS/IB: %s returned error(%d)\n",
>>>                    __func__, ret);
>>> +        goto out;
>>> +    }
>>> +
>>> +    if (!frmr->fr_reg)
>>> +        goto out;
>>> +
>>> +    /* Wait for the registration to complete in order to prevent an invalid
>>> +     * access error resulting from a race between the memory region already
>>> +     * being accessed while registration is still pending.
>>> +     */
>>> +    wait_event_timeout(frmr->fr_reg_done, !frmr->fr_reg,
>>> +               msecs_to_jiffies(100));
>>> +
>> This arbitrary timeout in this patch as well as pacth 1/7 which
>> Dave pointed out has any logic ?
>>
> 
> It's empirical (see my response to David's question):
> Memory registrations took longer than invalidations, hence 100msec instead of 10msec.
> 
>> MR registration command issued to hardware can at times take as
>> much as command timeout(e.g 60 seconds in CX3) and upto that its still
>> legitimate operation and not necessary failure. We shouldn't add
>> arbitrary time outs in ULPs.
> 
> Where did you find the 60 seconds for CX3 you are referring to?
> Is there a "generic" upper-bound that is not tied to a specific vendor / HCA?
> Can you provide a pointer?
> 
Look for command timeout in CX3 sources. 60 second is upper bound in
CX3. Its not standard in specs(at least not that I know) though
and may vary from vendor to vendor.

Regards,
Santosh


  reply	other threads:[~2019-07-01 21:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-01 16:39 [PATCH net-next 3/7] net/rds: Wait for the FRMR_IS_FREE (or FRMR_IS_STALE) transition after posting IB_WR_LOCAL_INV Gerd Rausch
2019-07-01 20:41 ` santosh.shilimkar
2019-07-01 20:55   ` Gerd Rausch
2019-07-01 21:00     ` santosh.shilimkar [this message]
2019-07-01 21:06       ` Gerd Rausch
2019-07-02  2:28         ` santosh.shilimkar
2019-07-02  5:11           ` Gerd Rausch
2019-07-02 16:49             ` santosh.shilimkar
2019-07-02 21:05               ` Gerd Rausch
2019-07-02 21:18                 ` santosh.shilimkar
2019-07-02 22:12                   ` Gerd Rausch
2019-07-02 22:47                     ` santosh.shilimkar

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=b5669540-3892-9d79-85ba-79e96ddd3a81@oracle.com \
    --to=santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=gerd.rausch@oracle.com \
    --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