On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 08:33:38AM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > > >>Note that the nvme completion queues are still on the host memory, so > >>this means we have lost the ordering between data and completions as > >>they go to different pcie targets. > > > >Hmm, in this simple up/down case with a switch, I think it might > >actually be OK. > > > >Transactions might not complete at the NVMe device before the CPU > >processes the RDMA completion, however due to the PCI-E ordering rules > >new TLPs directed to the NVMe will complete after the RMDA TLPs and > >thus observe the new data. (eg order preserving) > > > >It would be very hard to use P2P if fabric ordering is not preserved.. > > I think it still can race if the p2p device is connected with more than > a single port to the switch. > > Say it's connected via 2 legs, the bar is accessed from leg A and the > data from the disk comes via leg B. In this case, the data is heading > towards the p2p device via leg B (might be congested), the completion > goes directly to the RC, and then the host issues a read from the > bar via leg A. I don't understand what can guarantee ordering here. Right, this is why I qualified my statement with 'simple up/down case' Make it any more complex and it clearly stops working sanely, but I wouldn't worry about unusual PCI-E fabrics at this point.. > Stephen told me that this still guarantees ordering, but I honestly > can't understand how, perhaps someone can explain to me in a simple > way that I can understand. AFAIK PCI-E ordering is explicitly per link, so things that need order must always traverse the same link. 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
