On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 03:57:38PM -0800, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > > > > Are there any mandatory callbacks that EFA refuses other than this one > > > (which Gal said that it will support)? > > > > All the EOPNOTSUPP ones. It *really* doesn't support kverbs at > > all. > > Oh wow, didn't realize that :) Make the dicussion take a different light, doesn't it :) > > Which is why my first thought was to just not present it via the > > in-kernel client API at all. > > Definitely, it should not appear to the client API at all.. > This patch is needed most definitely. Okay, Gal should keep going on that then, and do something about the mandatory verbs. Probably failing mandatory verbs tests should hide the driver from the client API (except toward uverbs). > I'm sure that all of those (other than modify_qp) are trivial > to add but it doesn't really make sense to have them if userspace > is not using uverbs for them. If there is no modify_qp then the driver doesn't support the verbs QP FSM, and a lot of other stuff. Ie it is not really a verbs QP. :\ > > Only req_notify really extends into userspace verbs though. > > Is it? ibv_notify_cq doesn't go to the kernel afair.. There is a IB_USER_VERBS_CMD_REQ_NOTIFY_CQ .. Hmm.. Many drivers do this via a BAR page write, not via the syscall, so I guess we don't know if EFA needs this or not. Jason
