All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
	Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>,
	Avihai Horon <avihaih@nvidia.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next v1 2/2] RDMA/mlx5: Allow modifying Relaxed Ordering via fast registration
Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 12:09:13 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YK992cLoTRWG30H9@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210526194906.GA3646419@nvidia.com>

On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 04:49:06PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> Nothing does a FRWR with IB_ACCESS_DISABLE_RELAXED_ORDERING set
> 
> So why not leave the relaxed ordering bits masked in the UMR for FWRW
> so that the UMR doesn't change them at all and fail/panic if the
> caller requests IB_ACCESS_DISABLE_RELAXED_ORDERING ?

Yeah.  In fact we should check for that in the core, or by going even
further than my previous proposal and split IB_ACCESS_* even more fine
grained.

AFAICS we have the following uses cases:

 1) qp_access_flags as a bitmask of possible operations on the queue pair
    The way I understood the queue pairs this should really be just bits
    for remote read, remote write and atomics, but a few places also
    mess with memory windows and local write, which seems to be some
    sort of iWarp cludge
 2) IB_UVERBS_ACCESS_*.  These just get checked using ib_check_mr_access
    and then passed into ->reg_user_mr, ->rereg_user_mr and
    ->reg_user_mr_dmabuf
 3) in-kernel FRWR uses IB_ACCESS_*, but all users seem to hardcode it
    to IB_ACCESS_LOCAL_WRITE | IB_ACCESS_REMOTE_READ |
    IB_ACCESS_REMOTE_WRITE anyway

In other words:  I wonder if we should just kill off the current from of
IB_ACCESS_* entirely, as it is a weird mess used in totally different
ways in different code paths.

  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-27 11:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-20 10:13 [PATCH rdma-next v1 0/2] Enable relaxed ordering for ULPs Leon Romanovsky
2021-05-20 10:13 ` [PATCH rdma-next v1 1/2] RDMA: Enable Relaxed Ordering by default for kernel ULPs Leon Romanovsky
2021-05-27 10:28   ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-28 18:27   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-20 10:13 ` [PATCH rdma-next v1 2/2] RDMA/mlx5: Allow modifying Relaxed Ordering via fast registration Leon Romanovsky
2021-05-26 19:49   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-27 11:09     ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2021-05-27 14:57       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-27 15:06         ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-06-02 12:16     ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-05-26 19:30 ` [PATCH rdma-next v1 0/2] Enable relaxed ordering for ULPs Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-27  8:11   ` David Laight
2021-05-31 18:13     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-31 21:45       ` David Laight
2021-05-31 22:44         ` Jason Gunthorpe

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=YK992cLoTRWG30H9@infradead.org \
    --to=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=avihaih@nvidia.com \
    --cc=dledford@redhat.com \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=leon@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rdma@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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.