Re: [PATCH v4 10/27] IB/Verbs: Reform cm related part in IB-core cma/ucm

[Michael Wang]

On 04/16/2015 04:31 PM, Hefty, Sean wrote:
>>> This is equivalent to today where the checks are per node rather than
>>> per port.
>>>
>>> Should all checks here be port 1 based or only certain ones like listen
>>> ? For example, in connect/reject/disconnect, don't we already have port
>>> ? Guess this can be dealt with later as this is not a regression from
>>> the current implementation.
>>
>> Yeah, these parts of cma may need more carve in future, like some new
>> callback
>> for different CM type as Sean suggested.
>>
>> Maybe directly using 1 could help to highlight the problem ;-)
> 
> Only a few checks need to be per device.  I think I pointed those out previously.  Testing should show anywhere that we miss fairly quickly, since port would still be 0.  For the checks that can be updated to be per port, I would rather go ahead and convert them.

Got it, will be changed in next version :-)

To be confirmed:
				PORT ASSIGNED
	rdma_init_qp_attr	Y
	rdma_destroy_id		unknown
	cma_listen_on_dev	N
	cma_bind_loopback	N
	rdma_listen		N
	rdma_connect		Y
	rdma_accept		Y
	rdma_reject		Y
	rdma_disconnect		Y
	ib_ucm_add_one		N

Is this list correct?

Regards,
Michael Wang

> 
> - Sean
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/