From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sagi Grimberg Subject: Re: [PATCH] IB/core: Don't drain the receive queue for srq attached queue-pair Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 22:20:50 +0300 Message-ID: <571FBF92.9000609@grimberg.me> References: <1461682538-19647-1-git-send-email-sagi@grimberg.me> <571F841D.3010909@opengridcomputing.com> <20160426154328.GA12398@lst.de> <912C9E71-05E3-4ED9-9B41-137E131E3A71@oracle.com> <571F9084.2040506@opengridcomputing.com> <571F917C.40008@sandisk.com> <571F972B.6030904@opengridcomputing.com> <571FA4E5.2030501@sandisk.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <571FA4E5.2030501-XdAiOPVOjttBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Bart Van Assche , Steve Wise , Chuck Lever , Christoph Hellwig Cc: "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org >> If we make the requirement that the ib_drain_rq() caller must consume >> all completions for all QPs attached to an SRQ if they are outstanding, >> then I think we can modify ib_drain_rq() to post the drain recv WR to >> the SRQ. It should work, right? That won't work because it won't FLUSH (SRQ is stateless and does not FLUSH errors). > At least the ib_srpt driver already guarantees that no further receive > completions will be generated before ib_destroy_qp() is called. But > posting an additional receive WR on the SRQ from inside ib_drain_rq() > shouldn't hurt. It doesn't have any meaning either... -- 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