Eli Cohen wrote:
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx4/cq.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx4/cq.c
@@ -637,6 +637,7 @@ repoll:
case MLX4_OPCODE_SEND_IMM:
wc->wc_flags |= IB_WC_WITH_IMM;
case MLX4_OPCODE_SEND:
+ case MLX4_OPCODE_SEND_INVAL:
wc->opcode = IB_WC_SEND;
break;
case MLX4_OPCODE_RDMA_READ:
@@ -676,6 +677,13 @@ repoll:
wc->wc_flags = IB_WC_WITH_IMM;
wc->imm_data = cqe->immed_rss_invalid;
break;
+ case MLX4_RECV_OPCODE_SEND_INVAL:
+ wc->opcode = IB_WC_RECV;
+ wc->wc_flags = IB_WC_WITH_INVALIDATE;
+ /*
+ * TBD: maybe we should just call this ieth_val
+ */
+ wc->imm_data = be32_to_cpu(cqe->immed_rss_invalid);
Eli,
Is it correct that "cqe->immed_rss_invalid" equals
"wr->ex.invalidate_rkey" that was provided at the sender? if yes, any
reason not to have the same/similar union (imm_data/invalidate_rkey)
also for the work completion structure?
Or
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
