From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F4109C432C0 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 21:48:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2AF72073B for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 21:48:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Q80hv9Fr" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727499AbfLCVsT (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Dec 2019 16:48:19 -0500 Received: from mail-il1-f176.google.com ([209.85.166.176]:34848 "EHLO mail-il1-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727480AbfLCVsT (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Dec 2019 16:48:19 -0500 Received: by mail-il1-f176.google.com with SMTP id g12so4672602ild.2 for ; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 13:48:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=A19Pw1tPp8I9RS7X7QtpXVPnH3dxB18y6JWRMvT2H0I=; b=Q80hv9FrTfDUYvLUwk50duOP4ClHw4BBgIwwUEdXiKeGQhVQdDOEqa7NJAXoIaVjF2 dnCdiuI+Bq6yQPK3K854baeJ7twoZ+qdSJ0K1EL+rfmj61GMG+jejevQm/v4r9caEkXd lUNRwYZ5fvjvT3NT8qVOkSZiJ1L9vAXYflLHlC0UtlT8xZnZ2n8QaG3v3S+gJ6pG99jL nrEztCsoqlC0BMXr1WwmOODxYfyUJ+u28JqK+H2055PQg9ao1qyht10ywC/zSOJ/anqc aRXp0BsdgvGBe2/O7baXZG1tGBglLn03iVxndMAvMNboGmEZI80J4ovofMx03WZqXKS7 oWWA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=A19Pw1tPp8I9RS7X7QtpXVPnH3dxB18y6JWRMvT2H0I=; b=XKBrOBBkwQb0L1joZeDLO1KyLtKNg88cZt9r2C7tivjfSoFg3cmRSxyekalFAQiSIK wH8iNjzFhF/PJ64Pz4e51OG5aXceyDyaSBLaQoJICPrlmrBC7NnwSWcpVNYcg0pNDNKJ 5NfDpOhz3r/Maa/0HJk37yCOxRulj+vkoUP9P8DMBGFMz/2KENNUlZE+iKzpzwird41W yH+G9bK5/J+0YTfzm2a8qMFhe82khclRVhbKMDnI6YwtJVgFHgUMb6JdLnds39QAfWie uCFO5m0ao43bYJjJAC0q4XR/75SUvjifal6AVToYms+iEFvL0wN1XAfVmUwnpAh87bc7 NgDw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU09PO3rgeHg2PloE2BkNkyuTrmW5ZJbdjc6kveblUYVEPEen76 R1ZjZXfdbnlvy0QbeH4KclIkrHUj82BPCj5hnss= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwTexLsXgmadsKlG88UQMpu8s/UKBlZJkwve6En6jW9tO/P16uB5ZX6gmE+ZZWjZQCFtxisioNFCXZ/Jc+USGE= X-Received: by 2002:a92:3a58:: with SMTP id h85mr306689ila.245.1575409698140; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 13:48:18 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <53ed2e18-c58e-1e9c-55f8-60b14dfa2052@zju.edu.cn> <4433c97d-218a-294e-3c03-214e0ef1379f@acm.org> <20191127111008.GC10331@unreal> <8e8d9ecc-9406-11b3-242b-3a84f3702f79@acm.org> In-Reply-To: From: Steve Wise Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 15:48:07 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [question]can hard roce and soft roce communicate with each other? To: Bart Van Assche Cc: Leon Romanovsky , wangqi <3100102071@zju.edu.cn>, linux-rdma Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-rdma-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 7:57 PM Steve Wise wrote: > > Hey Bart, > > Well, as long as every implementation supports proper iCRC and RoCE > standards, I don't see how there could be a problem... > > Let me send my patch out now... > > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 6:57 PM Bart Van Assche wrote: > > > > On 11/27/19 6:24 AM, Steve Wise wrote: > > > I've recently uncovered a bug in RXE that causes iCRC errors when > > > running between RXE and a correct RoCE implementation. The bug is > > > that RXE is not including pad bytes in its iCRC calculations. So if > > > the application payload is not 4B aligned then you'll hit this bug. > > > You can see this by running ib_write_bw, for example, between mlnx_ib > > > and rxe. > > > > > > works: ib_write_bw -s 32 -n 5 > > > fails: ib_write_bw -s 33 -n 5 > > > > > > I'll post a patch this coming weekend hopefully. > > Hi Steve, > > > > Will that patch support coexistence of softRoCE implementations that use > > different CRC calculation methods? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Bart. In case anyone missed it, I posted my fix for unaligned payloads: https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rdma/msg86758.html Steve.