On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 09:04:39AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > I'm happy to do that if you're fine with the patch in general. amso1100
> > > should be trivial anyway, while ipath is a mess, just like the new intel
> > > driver with the third copy of the soft ib stack.
> >
> > Correct.
>
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 10:53:54AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/rdma.git/commitdiff/5d7e6fa563dae32d4b6f63e29e3795717a545f11
For the core bits:
Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe
Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 11:22:34AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> The uverbs change needs to drop/move the original kmalloc:
>
> next = kmalloc(ALIGN(sizeof *next, sizeof (struct ib_sge)) +
> user_wr->num_sge * sizeof (struct ib_sge),
>
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 09:04:39AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 09:07:14AM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
> > > Doug: was your mail a request to fix up the two de-staged drivers?
> > > I'm happy to do that if you're fine with the patch in general. amso1100
> > > should be
On Aug 13, 2015, at 9:04 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 09:07:14AM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
>>> Doug: was your mail a request to fix up the two de-staged drivers?
>>> I'm happy to do that if you're fine with the patch in general. amso1100
>>> should be trivial anyway,
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 09:07:14AM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
> > Doug: was your mail a request to fix up the two de-staged drivers?
> > I'm happy to do that if you're fine with the patch in general. amso1100
> > should be trivial anyway, while ipath is a mess, just like the new intel
> > driver
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 08:24:49PM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> Just a nit that I've noticed, in mlx4 set_fmr_seg params are not
> aligned to the parenthesis (maybe in other locations too but I haven't
> noticed such...)
This is just using a normal two tab indent for continued function
parameters
On 08/13/2015 01:54 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 07:24:44PM -0700, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> That makes sense, but you already Acked the change that breaks Lustre,
>> and it's going in through the NFS tree. Are you changing that to a NAK?
No. Lustre fits in my "languishing i
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 07:24:44PM -0700, Chuck Lever wrote:
> That makes sense, but you already Acked the change that breaks Lustre,
> and it's going in through the NFS tree. Are you changing that to a NAK?
It seems like Doug was mostly concened about to be removed drivers.
I defintively refuse t
> On Aug 12, 2015, at 6:45 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
>
>> On 08/07/2015 10:19 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 07, 2015 at 10:17:18AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
>>> If bot barking doesn't bother anyone, then I'll keep the removal patch.
>>> For some such a complaint might be grounds for
On 08/07/2015 10:19 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 07, 2015 at 10:17:18AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> If bot barking doesn't bother anyone, then I'll keep the removal patch.
>> For some such a complaint might be grounds for rejecting the patch.
>
> If it's (a) in tree proper and (b) n
On 8/6/2015 7:24 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
I've pushed out a new version. Updates:
- the ib_recv_wr change Bart notices has been fixed.
- iser and isert have been converted
- the handling of the embedded WR in the qib software queue entry
has been fixed.
Which means we're basicall
On 08/06/2015 09:24 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
I've pushed out a new version. Updates:
- the ib_recv_wr change Bart notices has been fixed.
- iser and isert have been converted
- the handling of the embedded WR in the qib software queue entry
has been fixed.
Which means we're basic
On 8/6/2015 11:24 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
I've pushed out a new version. Updates:
- the ib_recv_wr change Bart notices has been fixed.
- iser and isert have been converted
- the handling of the embedded WR in the qib software queue entry
has been fixed.
Which means we're basical
On Fri, Aug 07, 2015 at 10:17:18AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
> If bot barking doesn't bother anyone, then I'll keep the removal patch.
> For some such a complaint might be grounds for rejecting the patch.
If it's (a) in tree proper and (b) not one of the rare false positives I
would consider it a
On Aug 7, 2015, at 2:36 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 01:58:45PM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> Wondering if this means we'll have to drop ib_reg_phys_mr()
>> removal until Lustre gets around to removing their call sites
>> from the staging tree.
>
> Why? Just because th
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 07:46:44PM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> I agree that this is a shame to keep in here for everyone to carry...
> The only driver I've seen supporting XRC is mlx5 with no consumers.
>
> If people are reluctant to remove it, you can put it in ib_xrc_send_wr
> or something...
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 01:58:45PM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
> Wondering if this means we'll have to drop ib_reg_phys_mr()
> removal until Lustre gets around to removing their call sites
> from the staging tree.
Why? Just because the buildbot catches it?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send th
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 12:44:42PM -0500, Steve Wise wrote:
> > Driver/staging isn't considered in tree for global API change
> > perspective, so I didn't bother with all these staging drivers.
>
> The kbuild test bot will probably catch this.
It already did catch it for my tree, which is expect
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 11:08:45PM +0530, Parav Pandit wrote:
> Do you see value in dividing ib_ud _wr into ib_ud_wr and ib_ud_gsi_wr
> to save 4 bytes?
For now I just wanted to split along the lines of the existing unions.
>From looking at the various drivers splitting the GSI path might not be
a
Wise
>> Cc: Christoph Hellwig; linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org; Sagi Grimberg
>> Subject: Re: [RFC] split struct ib_send_wr
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 12:04:32PM -0500, Steve Wise wrote:
>>> You missed amso1100 (and probably ipath) that have been moved to
>>>
gt; Subject: Re: [RFC] split struct ib_send_wr
>
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 12:04:32PM -0500, Steve Wise wrote:
> > You missed amso1100 (and probably ipath) that have been moved to
> > drivers/staging...
>
> Driver/staging isn't considered in tree for global API chang
Do you see value in dividing ib_ud _wr into ib_ud_wr and ib_ud_gsi_wr
to save 4 bytes?
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 9:54 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> I've pushed out a new version. Updates:
>
> - the ib_recv_wr change Bart notices has been fixed.
> - iser and isert have been converted
> - the han
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 12:04:32PM -0500, Steve Wise wrote:
> You missed amso1100 (and probably ipath) that have been moved to
> drivers/staging...
Driver/staging isn't considered in tree for global API change
perspective, so I didn't bother with all these staging drivers.
--
To unsubscribe from t
On 8/6/2015 11:24 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
I've pushed out a new version. Updates:
- the ib_recv_wr change Bart notices has been fixed.
- iser and isert have been converted
- the handling of the embedded WR in the qib software queue entry
has been fixed.
Which means we're basical
On 8/6/2015 7:24 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
I've pushed out a new version. Updates:
- the ib_recv_wr change Bart notices has been fixed.
- iser and isert have been converted
Thanks Christoph!
- the handling of the embedded WR in the qib software queue entry
has been fixed.
Whic
I've pushed out a new version. Updates:
- the ib_recv_wr change Bart notices has been fixed.
- iser and isert have been converted
- the handling of the embedded WR in the qib software queue entry
has been fixed.
Which means we're basically done now and the patch could use
broader testing.
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 10:40:08PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> Any numbers on the struct size reduction?
sizeof(struct ib_send_wr) (old): 96
sizeof(struct ib_send_wr): 48
sizeof(struct ib_rdma_wr): 64
sizeof(struct ib_atomic_wr): 96
sizeof(struct ib_ud_wr): 88
sizeof(struct ib_fast_reg_wr): 8
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 07:34:47AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> please take a look at my RFC patch here:
>
>
> http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/scsi.git/commitdiff/751774250b71da83a26ba8584cff70f5e7bb7b1e
>
> the commit contains my explanation, but apparently the patch
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 09:36:49AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> >diff --git a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
> > [ ... ]
> > struct ib_recv_wr {
> >+struct ib_send_wr wr;
> > struct ib_recv_wr *next;
> > u64 wr_id;
> > struct ib_
On 08/04/2015 09:29 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 04:07:42PM +, Hefty, Sean wrote:
This looks like a reasonable start. It may help with feedback if you
could just post the changes to ib_verbs.h.
Not sure it's all that useful, but here we go:
diff --git a/include/rd
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 04:07:42PM +, Hefty, Sean wrote:
> This looks like a reasonable start. It may help with feedback if you
> could just post the changes to ib_verbs.h.
Not sure it's all that useful, but here we go:
diff --git a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
index 09
> please take a look at my RFC patch here:
>
> http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/scsi.git/commitdiff/751774250b71d
> a83a26ba8584cff70f5e7bb7b1e
>
> the commit contains my explanation, but apparently the patch is too
> large for the list limit and didn't make it through.
This looks like a
33 matches
Mail list logo
