On 26-Feb-19 21:20, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 05:33:03PM +0200, Gal Pressman wrote:
>> Add EFA node, transport and protocol types to core code.
>> In addition, EFA driver ID is added to the IOCTL interface uapi.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gal Pressman <galpress@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/infiniband/core/sysfs.c | 1 +
>> drivers/infiniband/core/verbs.c | 2 ++
>> include/rdma/ib_verbs.h | 8 ++++++--
>> include/uapi/rdma/rdma_user_ioctl_cmds.h | 1 +
>> 4 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/sysfs.c b/drivers/infiniband/core/sysfs.c
>> index 9b6a065bdfa5..f7fac4c81559 100644
>> --- a/drivers/infiniband/core/sysfs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/sysfs.c
>> @@ -1194,6 +1194,7 @@ static ssize_t node_type_show(struct device *device,
>> case RDMA_NODE_RNIC: return sprintf(buf, "%d: RNIC\n", dev->node_type);
>> case RDMA_NODE_USNIC: return sprintf(buf, "%d: usNIC\n", dev->node_type);
>> case RDMA_NODE_USNIC_UDP: return sprintf(buf, "%d: usNIC UDP\n", dev->node_type);
>> + case RDMA_NODE_EFA: return sprintf(buf, "%d: EFA\n", dev->node_type);
>> case RDMA_NODE_IB_SWITCH: return sprintf(buf, "%d: switch\n", dev->node_type);
>> case RDMA_NODE_IB_ROUTER: return sprintf(buf, "%d: router\n", dev->node_type);
>> default: return sprintf(buf, "%d: <unknown>\n", dev->node_type);
>> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/verbs.c b/drivers/infiniband/core/verbs.c
>> index 5a5e83f5f0fc..fc6f748a1933 100644
>> --- a/drivers/infiniband/core/verbs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/verbs.c
>> @@ -218,6 +218,8 @@ rdma_node_get_transport(enum rdma_node_type node_type)
>> return RDMA_TRANSPORT_USNIC_UDP;
>> if (node_type == RDMA_NODE_RNIC)
>> return RDMA_TRANSPORT_IWARP;
>> + if (node_type == RDMA_NODE_EFA)
>> + return RDMA_TRANSPORT_EFA;
>>
>> return RDMA_TRANSPORT_IB;
>> }
>> diff --git a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
>> index 225cb76d469f..55534aba22bf 100644
>> --- a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
>> +++ b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
>> @@ -108,6 +108,7 @@ enum rdma_node_type {
>> RDMA_NODE_RNIC,
>> RDMA_NODE_USNIC,
>> RDMA_NODE_USNIC_UDP,
>> + RDMA_NODE_EFA,
>> };
>>
>> enum {
>> @@ -119,14 +120,16 @@ enum rdma_transport_type {
>> RDMA_TRANSPORT_IB,
>> RDMA_TRANSPORT_IWARP,
>> RDMA_TRANSPORT_USNIC,
>> - RDMA_TRANSPORT_USNIC_UDP
>> + RDMA_TRANSPORT_USNIC_UDP,
>> + RDMA_TRANSPORT_EFA,
>> };
>>
>> enum rdma_protocol_type {
>> RDMA_PROTOCOL_IB,
>> RDMA_PROTOCOL_IBOE,
>> RDMA_PROTOCOL_IWARP,
>> - RDMA_PROTOCOL_USNIC_UDP
>> + RDMA_PROTOCOL_USNIC_UDP,
>> + RDMA_PROTOCOL_EFA,
>> };
>
> Everything above is backed by specification. I disagree that we need
> to declare new transport, protocol and node every time some large company
> decides to reinvent the wheel. Especially if this company refuses
> provide specification grade documentation.
EFA is not an IB_CA node/IB transport/IB protocol.
We have two options:
1. Add EFA definitions
2. Add 'unspecified' definitions
Both will not be backed up by the spec, at least with option #1 we'll have more
information than an ambiguous unspecified.
