On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 03:33:26PM +0300, Shamir Rabinovitch wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 03:25:32PM +0300, Shamir Rabinovitch wrote:
> > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 12:18:40PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 10:53:20AM +0300, Shamir Rabinovitch wrote:
> > > > In shared object model ib_pd can belong to 1 or more ib_ucontext.
> > > > Fix the nldev code so it could report multiple context ids.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Shamir Rabinovitch <shamir.rabinovitch@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > + if (!rdma_is_kernel_res(res)) {
> > > > + pd_context(pd, &pd_context_ids);
> > > > + list_for_each_entry(ctx_id, &pd_context_ids, list) {
> > > > + if (nla_put_u32(msg, RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_CTXN,
> > > > + ctx_id->id))
> > >
> > > Did it work? You are overwriting RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_CTXN entry in the
> > > loop. You need to add RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_CTX and
> > > RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_CTX_ENTRY to include/uapi/rdma_netlink.h and
> > > open nested table here (inside of PD) with list of contexts.
> > >
> > > > + goto err;
> > > > + }
> >
> > Hi Leon,
> >
> > Just to clarify the above nesting...
> >
> > Do you expect the below NL attribute nesting in case of shared pd dump?
> >
> > RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_CTX
> > RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_CTX_ENTRY
> > RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_CTXN #1
> > RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_CTXN #2
> > ...
> > RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_CTXN #N
> >
> >
> > I tried this and rdmatool reported:
> >
> > [root@qemu-fc29 iproute2]# rdma/rdma res show pd dev mlx4_0
> > dev mlx4_0 pdn 0 local_dma_lkey 0x8000 users 4 comm [ib_core]
> > dev mlx4_0 pdn 1 local_dma_lkey 0x8000 users 4 comm [ib_core]
> > error: Operation not supported
> >
> > Is this the expected behaviour from unmodified latest rdmatool?
> >
> > Thanks
>
> Leon,
>
> I tried this nesting (which make more sense to me) and results are the
> same as above.
>
> RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_CTX
> RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_CTX_ENTRY
> RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_CTXN
> RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_CTX_ENTRY
> RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_CTXN
> ...
>
> Which is the nesting you expect ?
Sorry, I was OOO and slightly try to catch all emails.
This latest variant looks right to me.
>
> Is it OK that we get the rdma tool "error: Operation not supported" ?
Definitely not. I don't see the origin of that error, it didn't come from rdmatool.
Thanks
>
> Thanks
