On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 03:21:04PM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > I gotta say, > > these suggestions of bool/write or supported_ops with a convert helper > seem (to me at least) to make things more complicated. > > Why not just set the the access_flags as they are? > I want local use? > set IB_ACCESS_LOCAL_WRITE > I want a peer to read from me? > set IB_ACCESS_REMOTE_READ > I want a peer to write to me? > IB_ACCESS_REMOTE_WRITE > ... > > isn't it much simpler? I don't have a really strong preference, but I like the idea of using the OP names because it means the API cannot be used wrong. Ie this, is absolutely wrong: rdma_map_sg_lkey(..,IB_ACCESS_REMOTE_READ); But this: rdma_map_sg_lkey(..,IB_ACCESS_REMOTE_WRITE); Is only wrong on IB. While, rdma_map_sg_lkey(..,RDMA_OP_RDMA_READ) Is always right, and can never be used wrong, and thus is less complicated (for the ULP). > If we want to mask out iWARP difference, we use the Steve's > roles_to_access() helper thing... If that scheme exists, it's usage should be mandatory, IMHO. However, iwarp needs more than just flag translation, it also can't use the local_dma_lkey .. If we can come to a scheme to support iWarp (wrappers!) then the rdma_map_sg_lkey is largely an internal function and it can stick with IB_ACCESS flags... The main use of rdma_map_sg_lkey is to support iWarp's RDMA READ requirement. rdma_map_sg_rkey is the commonly used API, and I can't think of a reason why it needs the roles buisness beyond symmetry.. Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
