On 10/22/2013 9:20 PM, Hefty, Sean wrote:
Would we lose anything making this a new operation for the QP, versus
trying to hook it into the existing ib_post_send call?
If I understand correctly you are suggesting making it a verb? Well this
operation is a fast-path operation - so I guess we will loose it in this
case.
Take SCSI for example, for each IO operation submitted by SCSI
mid-layer, transport layer should perform any protection policy that
SCSI asked for.
From this point of view, signature operation resembles fast
registration (since the transport does not own the IOP data buffers, so
it uses fast registration methods).
That is why we are hooking into ib_post_send.
I'm suggesting multiple calls that can post to the send queue, rather than one
call that does a giant switch statement at the beginning based on the opcode.
Although I understand where you are coming from, We also lose in this case.
If we go down this rode, we block the user from saving a HW doorbell by
concatenating signature and RDMA WRs to a post list.
I assume this is why fast_reg is also an extension of ib_post_send.
--
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
--
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
