From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754633AbdFWWHE (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jun 2017 18:07:04 -0400 Received: from esa8.dell-outbound.iphmx.com ([68.232.149.218]:29747 "EHLO esa8.dell-outbound.iphmx.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752170AbdFWWHC (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jun 2017 18:07:02 -0400 X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.4.3 mailuogwprd53.lss.emc.com v5NM6wue006603 From: "Allen Hubbe" To: "'Logan Gunthorpe'" , "'Jon Mason'" Cc: , , "'Dave Jiang'" , "'Serge Semin'" , "'Kurt Schwemmer'" , "'Stephen Bates'" , "'Greg Kroah-Hartman'" References: <20170615203729.9009-1-logang@deltatee.com> <20170619200659.GA20437@kudzu.us> <9615f074-5b81-210b-eb88-218a59d65198@deltatee.com> <000001d2eb85$daecdea0$90c69be0$@dell.com> <8a1ff94c-8689-0d4c-cc33-7b495daa065a@deltatee.com> <000101d2eba4$b45b1e40$1d115ac0$@dell.com> <000201d2eba8$dade4ac0$909ae040$@dell.com> <4d932597-3592-2ce1-5a5f-cb5ba36a3a93@deltatee.com> <000001d2ec23$2bd9f300$838dd900$@dell.com> <5aa9c438-e152-4caa-2c6d-cbbd130a0eb2@deltatee.com> <000101d2ec53$f2830840$d78918c0$@dell.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: New NTB API Issue Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 18:06:42 -0400 Message-ID: <000301d2ec6c$ffe3d4b0$ffab7e10$@dell.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Thread-Index: AQHS63McR9kZVmncfUmZ30VT98lohaIxNz3lgAAzH2CAAEzugP//vSvQgABLPwCAAKeOIIAAhrKA///PftCAAHAzgP//wC8w Content-Language: en-us X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Sentrion-Hostname: mailuogwprd53.lss.emc.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mail.home.local id v5NM7E0u018223 From: Logan Gunthorpe > But any translation can be > programmed by any peer. That doesn't seem safe. Even though it can be done as you say, would it not be better to have each specific translation under the control of exactly one driver? If drivers can reach across and set the translation of any peer bar, they would still need to negotiate among N peers which one sets which other's translation. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from esa6.dell-outbound.iphmx.com (esa6.dell-outbound.iphmx.com. [68.232.149.229]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o206si328895ywb.12.2017.06.23.15.07.02 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 23 Jun 2017 15:07:03 -0700 (PDT) From: "Allen Hubbe" References: <20170615203729.9009-1-logang@deltatee.com> <20170619200659.GA20437@kudzu.us> <9615f074-5b81-210b-eb88-218a59d65198@deltatee.com> <000001d2eb85$daecdea0$90c69be0$@dell.com> <8a1ff94c-8689-0d4c-cc33-7b495daa065a@deltatee.com> <000101d2eba4$b45b1e40$1d115ac0$@dell.com> <000201d2eba8$dade4ac0$909ae040$@dell.com> <4d932597-3592-2ce1-5a5f-cb5ba36a3a93@deltatee.com> <000001d2ec23$2bd9f300$838dd900$@dell.com> <5aa9c438-e152-4caa-2c6d-cbbd130a0eb2@deltatee.com> <000101d2ec53$f2830840$d78918c0$@dell.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: New NTB API Issue Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 18:06:42 -0400 Message-ID: <000301d2ec6c$ffe3d4b0$ffab7e10$@dell.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en-us To: 'Logan Gunthorpe' , 'Jon Mason' Cc: linux-ntb@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 'Dave Jiang' , 'Serge Semin' , 'Kurt Schwemmer' , 'Stephen Bates' , 'Greg Kroah-Hartman' List-ID: From: Logan Gunthorpe > But any translation can be > programmed by any peer. That doesn't seem safe. Even though it can be done as you say, would it = not be better to have each specific translation under the control of = exactly one driver? If drivers can reach across and set the translation of any peer bar, = they would still need to negotiate among N peers which one sets which = other's translation.