On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 12:04:00PM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > > Just curious if you ever though of moving this into the generic > > rdma layer? > > Not really. The new files are really just shims that adapt the RPC/RDMA > transport to memory registration verbs. There?s only a few hundred lines > per registration mode, and it?s all fairly specific to RPC/RDMA. While it's using RPC/RDMA specific data structures it basically abstracts out the action of mapping a number of pages onto the rdma hardware. There isn't a whole lot of interaction with the actual sunrpc layer except for a few hardcoded limits. Btw, this is not a critique of the code, it's an obvious major improvement of what was there before, it justs seems like it would be nice to move it up to a higher layer. > > And from I see we litterly dont use them much different from the generic > > dma mapping API helpers (at a very high level) so it seems it should > > be easy to move a slightly expanded version of your API to the core > > code. > > IMO FRWR is the only registration mode that has legs for the long term, > and is specifically designed for storage. > > If you are not working on a legacy piece of code that has to support > older HCAs, why not stay with FRWR? The raw FRWR API seems like an absolute nightmare, and I'm bound to get it wrong at first :) This is only half joking, but despite that it's the first target for sure. It's just very frustrating that there is no usable common API. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
