Re: [PATCH, RFC] rdma: split struct ib_send_wr

2015-08-04 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 08:06:16PM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote: Question though, a ULP may want to keep a couple of WRs around instead of having each allocated in the stack and handled one by one. We need to provide it with a hint of what is the size it needs. Note that with the drastic shrink

Re: [PATCH, RFC] rdma: split struct ib_send_wr

2015-08-04 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 08:44:26PM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote: I do agree that the size on the stack is less of an issue now. What still can matter is handling each wr one by one vs. doing a collective post. But if structured correctly you can still do that with on-stack WRs. I can

Re: [PATCH, RFC] rdma: split struct ib_send_wr

2015-08-04 Thread Sagi Grimberg
On 8/4/2015 8:47 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 08:44:26PM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote: I do agree that the size on the stack is less of an issue now. What still can matter is handling each wr one by one vs. doing a collective post. But if structured correctly you can

Re: [PATCH, RFC] rdma: split struct ib_send_wr

2015-08-04 Thread Sagi Grimberg
On 8/4/2015 10:16 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: This patch split up struct ib_send_wr so that all non-trivial verbs use their own structure which embedds struct ib_send_wr. This dramaticly shrinks the size of a WR for most common operations. Hey Christoph, I think this looks good in general.

Re: [PATCH, RFC] rdma: split struct ib_send_wr

2015-08-04 Thread Sagi Grimberg
On 8/4/2015 8:23 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 08:06:16PM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote: Question though, a ULP may want to keep a couple of WRs around instead of having each allocated in the stack and handled one by one. We need to provide it with a hint of what is the size