Re: [PATCH rdma-next 4/4] RDMA/mlx5: Use query_special_contexts for mkeys

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 05:04:03PM -0800, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> On 04 Jan 16:03, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 09:56:21AM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 03:55:25PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 09:13:10AM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 03:09:54PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 09:03:06AM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 10:11:25AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > > > > > -int mlx5_cmd_null_mkey(struct mlx5_core_dev *dev, u32 *null_mkey)
> > > > > > > > -{
> > > > > > > > -	u32 out[MLX5_ST_SZ_DW(query_special_contexts_out)] = {};
> > > > > > > > -	u32 in[MLX5_ST_SZ_DW(query_special_contexts_in)] = {};
> > > > > > > > -	int err;
> > > > > > > > +	err = mlx5_cmd_exec_inout(dev->mdev, query_special_contexts, in, out);
> > > > > > > > +	if (err)
> > > > > > > > +		return err;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -	MLX5_SET(query_special_contexts_in, in, opcode,
> > > > > > > > -		 MLX5_CMD_OP_QUERY_SPECIAL_CONTEXTS);
> > > > > > > > -	err = mlx5_cmd_exec_inout(dev, query_special_contexts, in, out);
> > > > > > > > -	if (!err)
> > > > > > > > -		*null_mkey = MLX5_GET(query_special_contexts_out, out,
> > > > > > > > -				      null_mkey);
> > > > > > > > -	return err;
> > > > > > > > +	if (MLX5_CAP_GEN(dev->mdev, dump_fill_mkey))
> > > > > > > > +		dev->mkeys.dump_fill_mkey = MLX5_GET(query_special_contexts_out,
> > > > > > > > +						     out, dump_fill_mkey);
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > +	if (MLX5_CAP_GEN(dev->mdev, null_mkey))
> > > > > > > > +		dev->mkeys.null_mkey = cpu_to_be32(
> > > > > > > > +			MLX5_GET(query_special_contexts_out, out, null_mkey));
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > +	if (MLX5_CAP_GEN(dev->mdev, terminate_scatter_list_mkey)) {
> > > > > > > > +		dev->mkeys.terminate_scatter_list_mkey =
> > > > > > > > +			cpu_to_be32(MLX5_GET(query_special_contexts_out, out,
> > > > > > > > +					     terminate_scatter_list_mkey));
> > > > > > > > +		return 0;
> > > > > > > > +	}
> > > > > > > > +	dev->mkeys.terminate_scatter_list_mkey =
> > > > > > > > +		MLX5_TERMINATE_SCATTER_LIST_LKEY;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This is already stored in the core dev, why are you recalculating it
> > > > > > > here?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It is not recalculating but setting default value. In core dev, we will
> > > > > > have value only if MLX5_CAP_GEN(dev->mdev, terminate_scatter_list_mkey)
> > > > > > is true.
> > > > >
> > > > > No, it has the identical code:
> > > > >
> > > > > +static int mlx5_get_terminate_scatter_list_mkey(struct mlx5_core_dev *dev)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > +       if (MLX5_CAP_GEN(dev, terminate_scatter_list_mkey)) {
> > > > > +               dev->terminate_scatter_list_mkey =
> > > > > +                       cpu_to_be32(MLX5_GET(query_special_contexts_out, out,
> > > > > +                                            terminate_scatter_list_mkey));
> > > > > +               return 0;
> > > > > +       }
> > > > > +       dev->terminate_scatter_list_mkey = MLX5_TERMINATE_SCATTER_LIST_LKEY;
> > > >
> > > > Ahh, you are talking about that.
> > > > terminate_scatter_list_mkey is part of an output from MLX5_CMD_OP_QUERY_SPECIAL_CONTEXTS,
> > > > which is needed to get other mkeys. So instead of doing special logic
> > > > for the terminate_scatter_list_mkey, we decided to use same pattern as
> > > > for other mkeys, which don't belong to core.
> > > 
> > > Regardless, don't duplicate the code and maybe don't even duplicate
> > > the storage of the terminate_scatter_list_mkey
> > 
> > ok, will update and resend.
> > 
> 
> Please provide a helper mlx5_get_xyz function, avoid assuming mlx5_core will store
> it in dev->xyz.

This helper was used in this version of patch and it is:
 MLX5_GET(query_special_contexts_out, out, terminate_scatter_list_mkey))
Which was dropped in favor of Jason's request to rely on mlx5_core_dev
as this value already known:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1672917578.git.leonro@xxxxxxxxxx

I don't like the idea to add obfuscation function just for the sake of
obfuscation. If you don't want access to mlx5_core_dev, please argue with
Jason to accept first variant.

Thanks



[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Photo]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux