On 12/5/2018 1:42 PM, Shalev, Leah wrote:
Using QP0 for anything other than passing IB management packets is basically a hack, why should this be a model for other devices?
That's not what I was asking. I was asking if it serves a different
purpose and I'm inferring that it does in fact have a use that is different.
Perhaps this is more analogous to the ibdev? Just trying to put this all
in context.
As to the IOCTL interface that's nothing to do with the QP0/AQ. It's how
you interact with the device through the rdma core. This follows along
with the discussions Jason and I have been having in reply to the other
patches.
There was a lot of work done to design a user interface that is both
flexible and secure. Was this considered?
-Denny
Leah
________________________________________
From: linux-rdma-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <linux-rdma-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2018 5:40 PM
To: Pressman, Gal; Doug Ledford; Jason Gunthorpe
Cc: Matushevsky, Alexander; Leybovich, Yossi; linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Tom Tucker
Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next 02/13] RDMA/efa: Add EFA device definitions
On 12/4/2018 7:04 AM, Gal Pressman wrote:
EFA PCIe device implements a single Admin Queue (AQ) and Admin Completion Queue
(ACQ) pair to initialize and communicate configuration with the device (similar
to NVMe and ENA network device).
Through this pair, we run SET/GET commands for querying and configuring the
device, CREATE/MODIFY/DESTROY queues, and IB specific commands like Address
Handler (AH), Memory Registration (MR) and Protection Domains (PD).
So this AQ is not like QP0 in IB/OPA then? You send commands to this
queue, including IB commands, and don't use the IOCTL interface. Why
wouldn't you want to leverage the existing way?
-Denny
