Re: [PATCHv10 08/12] mlx4: Add support for IBoE - address resolution

2010-10-21 Thread Roland Dreier
> This was added in the past when I wanted to use the pointer to the net > device to resolve any IPv6 address. Since we only resolve link local > addresses, why don't we just remove the spinlocks and the check inside > it? OK, easy enough. - R. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

Re: [PATCHv10 08/12] mlx4: Add support for IBoE - address resolution

2010-10-21 Thread Roland Dreier
> I don't get this. For IB, we have 72 without immediate - did you > forget to add the ICRC? I think we count it with the header... We don't need ICRC in the header_buf, do we? We're talking about MLX4_IB_UD_HEADER_SIZE, which is used to hold the packet header we get from ib_ud_header_pack().

Re: [PATCHv10 08/12] mlx4: Add support for IBoE - address resolution

2010-10-21 Thread Eli Cohen
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 02:15:47PM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote: > > (It probably works in practice because the allocation of sqp structs > > gets rounded up enough) > > And I guess also no one actually ends up sending MADs with immediate > data, so that saves 4 bytes off the worst case too... I

Re: [PATCHv10 08/12] mlx4: Add support for IBoE - address resolution

2010-10-21 Thread Eli Cohen
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 02:14:11PM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote: > > enum { > >/* > > * Largest possible UD header: send with GRH and immediate data. > > + * 4 bytes added to accommodate for eth header instead of lrh > > */ > > - MLX4_IB_UD_HEADER_SIZE = 72, > > + MLX

Re: [PATCHv10 08/12] mlx4: Add support for IBoE - address resolution

2010-10-21 Thread Eli Cohen
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:57:31PM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote: > Also I don't see anywhere that the global functions > > > +int eth_to_ib_width(int w) > > +int eth_to_ib_speed(int s) > > are called? > Right. Let's remove them. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux

Re: [PATCHv10 08/12] mlx4: Add support for IBoE - address resolution

2010-10-21 Thread Eli Cohen
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:48:00PM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote: > int mlx4_ib_resolve_grh(struct mlx4_ib_dev *dev, const struct ib_ah_attr > *ah_attr, > u8 *mac, int *is_mcast, u8 port) > { > struct mlx4_ib_iboe *iboe = &dev->iboe; > struct in6_addr in6; > >

Re: [PATCHv10 08/12] mlx4: Add support for IBoE - address resolution

2010-10-21 Thread Roland Dreier
> (It probably works in practice because the allocation of sqp structs > gets rounded up enough) And I guess also no one actually ends up sending MADs with immediate data, so that saves 4 bytes off the worst case too... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in

Re: [PATCHv10 08/12] mlx4: Add support for IBoE - address resolution

2010-10-21 Thread Roland Dreier
> enum { > /* > * Largest possible UD header: send with GRH and immediate data. > + * 4 bytes added to accommodate for eth header instead of lrh > */ > -MLX4_IB_UD_HEADER_SIZE = 72, > +MLX4_IB_UD_HEADER_SIZE = 76, I don't understand this chang

Re: [PATCHv10 08/12] mlx4: Add support for IBoE - address resolution

2010-10-21 Thread Roland Dreier
Also I don't see anywhere that the global functions > +int eth_to_ib_width(int w) > +int eth_to_ib_speed(int s) are called? - R. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.k

Re: [PATCHv10 08/12] mlx4: Add support for IBoE - address resolution

2010-10-21 Thread Roland Dreier
> > Just curious -- what's up with this change here? Is this connected to > > IBoE support, or is this an independent fix? > > It is required for proper distribution of IBoE multicast packets while > still not hurting the mlx4_en driver's operation. OK, I split this into a separate patch fo

RE: libverbs version confusion

2010-10-21 Thread Bob Pearson
Thanks Jason, That fixed it. Bob -Original Message- From: Jason Gunthorpe [mailto:jguntho...@obsidianresearch.com] Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 11:48 AM To: Bob Pearson Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: libverbs version confusion On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 01:00:55AM -0500,

perftest

2010-10-21 Thread Hefty, Sean
Does anyone know what the latest perftest.git tree is? Has this been moved over to the new server? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: libverbs version confusion

2010-10-21 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 01:00:55AM -0500, Bob Pearson wrote: > I have an application that links to -libverbs (1.5.2) and for some reason > ibv_open_device goes to the compat 1.0 version not the default one. Other > apps in the same development tree and the standard ones like ib_send_bw all > link t

[PATCH v2] RDMA/cxgb3: When a user QP is marked in error, also mark the CQs in error.

2010-10-21 Thread Steve Wise
The flushing of work requests for user QPs is implemented entirely in the user mode library. The only kernel interaction is to mark the user QP object indicating it is in error when the QP exits RTS. When the user QP operations are called by the application (eg: post_send, post_recv), the QP in e

Re: [PATCH 2/2] RPING: Remove printf for FLUSH completion.

2010-10-21 Thread Steve Wise
On 10/20/2010 4:12 PM, Hefty, Sean wrote: I applied this, but am waiting on the other patch until the discussion finishes up. Since pthread_cancel() seems to be iffy for user verbs, maybe I'll try another approach: Since the rping main thread issues an rdma_disconnect(), we can assume that

Re: [PATCH 1/2] RPING: Make sure CQ event thread exits before destroying the CQ.

2010-10-21 Thread Bart Van Assche
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Jason Gunthorpe > wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 03:56:38PM -0500, Steve Wise wrote: > > > >> Hey Jason, do you have a pointer to the list of pthread cancellation > >> points for Linux? > > > > Sure

Re: [PATCH 1/2] RPING: Make sure CQ event thread exits before destroying the CQ.

2010-10-21 Thread Bart Van Assche
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 03:56:38PM -0500, Steve Wise wrote: > >> Hey Jason, do you have a pointer to the list of pthread cancellation >> points for Linux? > > Sure do > > http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online/pages/man7/pthreads.7.htm

Re: [PATCHv10 08/12] mlx4: Add support for IBoE - address resolution

2010-10-21 Thread Eli Cohen
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:22:56PM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote: > Just curious -- what's up with this change here? Is this connected to > IBoE support, or is this an independent fix? It is required for proper distribution of IBoE multicast packets while still not hurting the mlx4_en driver's opera