On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 01:01:23PM +0100, Roman Penyaev wrote:
> >> +static int ibtrs_ib_dev_init(struct ibtrs_ib_dev *d, struct ib_device
> >> *dev)
> >> +{
> >> + int err;
> >> +
> >> + d->pd = ib_alloc_pd(dev, IB_PD_UNSAFE_GLOBAL_RKEY);
> >> + if (IS_ERR(d->pd))
> >> + return PTR_ERR(d->pd);
> >> + d->dev = dev;
> >> + d->lkey = d->pd->local_dma_lkey;
> >> + d->rkey = d->pd->unsafe_global_rkey;
> >> +
> >> + err = ibtrs_query_device(d);
> >> + if (unlikely(err))
> >> + ib_dealloc_pd(d->pd);
> >> +
> >> + return err;
> >> +}
> >
> >
> > I must say that this makes me frustrated.. We stopped doing these
> > sort of things long time ago. No way we can even consider accepting
> > the unsafe use of the global rkey exposing the entire memory space for
> > remote access permissions.
> >
> > Sorry for being blunt, but this protocol design which makes a concious
> > decision to expose unconditionally is broken by definition.
>
> I suppose we can also afford the same trick which nvme does: provide
> register_always module argument, can we? That can be also interesting
> to measure the performance difference.
I can be firmer than Sagi - new code that has IB_PD_UNSAFE_GLOBAL_RKEY
at can not be accepted upstream.
Once you get that fixed, you should go and read my past comments on
how to properly order dma mapping and completions and fix that
too. Then redo your performance..
Jason
