From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: When IBoE will be merged to upstream? Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 01:35:36 -0600 Message-ID: <20100702073536.GB7958@obsidianresearch.com> References: <20100624203701.GA4630@obsidianresearch.com> <20100625155755.GC4630@obsidianresearch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Liran Liss Cc: "Hefty, Sean" , Roland Dreier , Aleksey Senin , linux-rdma , "monis-smomgflXvOZWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org" , "alekseys-smomgflXvOZWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org" , "yiftahs-smomgflXvOZWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org" , Tziporet Koren , "alexr-smomgflXvOZWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 02:50:55PM +0300, Liran Liss wrote: > We have a specification, we have an implementation, and we have > clean way of passing RoCE L2 information to user-space via address > handles. I don't see any substantial reason to change the basic > approach. Actually, we have a spec that omits how to do the L3 to L2 address mapping - and there is much disagreement on this point. Since no standard was reached then agreement will have to be reached at least with the Linux maintainers before I think anything can realistically be merged. The basic approach must be something people can agree on, and it seem pretty clear to me at least that the current approach is not agreeable to many people. All three of your points are all entirely avoidable if you simply stick to the idea that the L3 address is a GID and not an IP, and rely on IPoIB like RDMA-CM mechanisms to go from IP to GID to L2 MAC/VLAN. Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html