David Dillow wrote:
On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 11:58 -0800, Vu Pham wrote:
David Dillow wrote:
either. The SRP FMR mapping code is careful to mask the SG address with
the FMR page mask, so we should never ask the HCA to map a page with the
first_byte_offset != 0. Instead, we tell the target
On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 11:58 -0800, Vu Pham wrote:
David Dillow wrote:
either. The SRP FMR mapping code is careful to mask the SG address with
the FMR page mask, so we should never ask the HCA to map a page with the
first_byte_offset != 0. Instead, we tell the target to request an IO
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 10:51:13AM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
Maybe we can use MST's current email to ask him... Michael, do you have
any memory of the issue we worked around here?
I have question regarding workaround introduced in commit 559ce8f1 of
the mainline tree:
On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 10:21 -0800, Vu Pham wrote:
David Dillow wrote:
On Fri, 2011-01-07 at 20:05 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
looking at the patch, I would guess that the corruption occurred when
the target got an IO request that started at a non-page-aligned address
but that spanned more
On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 10:49 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
I think that the patch is specific for srp initiator using Mellanox
FMR. It tried to avoid indirect desc with Mellanox FMR having
first-byte-offset != 0. Since the low level implementation of
mlx4/mthca_map_phys_fmr() did not
David Dillow wrote:
On Fri, 2011-01-07 at 20:05 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
I'm sure this was tested and shown to fix the problem; I'm just confused
as to what the problem really was and if this is still relevant. Can
someone please enlighten me?
At this point I'm afraid it's all lost
I think that the patch is specific for srp initiator using Mellanox
FMR. It tried to avoid indirect desc with Mellanox FMR having
first-byte-offset != 0. Since the low level implementation of
mlx4/mthca_map_phys_fmr() did not create + setup MPT for FMR with
first_byte_offset != 0. The
Maybe we can use MST's current email to ask him... Michael, do you have
any memory of the issue we worked around here?
I have question regarding workaround introduced in commit 559ce8f1 of
the mainline tree:
IB/srp: Work around data corruption bug on Mellanox targets
Roland Dreier wrote:
I think that the patch is specific for srp initiator using Mellanox
FMR. It tried to avoid indirect desc with Mellanox FMR having
first-byte-offset != 0. Since the low level implementation of
mlx4/mthca_map_phys_fmr() did not create + setup MPT for FMR with
David Dillow wrote:
On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 10:21 -0800, Vu Pham wrote:
David Dillow wrote:
On Fri, 2011-01-07 at 20:05 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
looking at the patch, I would guess that the corruption occurred when
the target got an IO request that started at a non-page-aligned address
I have question regarding workaround introduced in commit 559ce8f1 of
the mainline tree:
IB/srp: Work around data corruption bug on Mellanox targets
Data corruption has been seen with Mellanox SRP targets when FMRs
create a memory region with I/O virtual address != 0. Add a
On Fri, 2011-01-07 at 20:05 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
I'm sure this was tested and shown to fix the problem; I'm just confused
as to what the problem really was and if this is still relevant. Can
someone please enlighten me?
At this point I'm afraid it's all lost in the mists of time,
I'm sure this was tested and shown to fix the problem; I'm just confused
as to what the problem really was and if this is still relevant. Can
someone please enlighten me?
At this point I'm afraid it's all lost in the mists of time, but the
original patch seems to have come from
13 matches
Mail list logo
