Hi Tejun, On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:16 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 06:38:37PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 01:11:18PM +0530, Parav Pandit wrote: >> > Hi Leon, Tejun, Christoph, Liran, Doug, Matan, >> > >> > So are you ok with below proposal? >> >> I'm fine with it and it looks like very clean approach >> to solve our multi-object future. > > No ojbection. Parav, can you write up how the interface would look > like with examples? Simplified version of v12 with no architecture change. I will describe below. user-kernel interface: --------------------------- (a) rdma.current - Will continue to report resource count. (b) rdma.max - will continue to accept hca_handles, and hca_objects as absolute number. Instead of mr, pd, qp, ah, srq entries of patch_v12, it will have just two entries for each device. (1) hca_handles, (2) hca_objects. rdmacg - IB stack interface: -------------------------------- cgroup_rdma.h will have two enum entries. RDMACG_RESOURCE_HCA_HANDLE RDMACG_RESOURCE_OBJECT IB stack will charge either of the object. When HCA handles are allocated/freed IB core will request charge/uncharge. When standard verb resources such as PD, MR, CQ, QP, SRQ are allocated/freed IB core will request for XX_OBJECT charge/uncharge. Currently defined APIs and interfaces just remains same. -- 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
