On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 10:43:59AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 10/2/19 10:24 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 01:51:00PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 08:21:45AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > > > On 10/2/19 7:14 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 04:17:01PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > > > > > Management datagrams (MADs) are not supported by SR-IOV VFs nor by > > > > > > iWARP > > > > > > > > > > Really? This seems surprising to me.. > > > > > > > > Hi Jason, > > > > > > > > Last time I checked the Mellanox drivers allow MADs to be sent over a > > > > SR-IOV VF but do not allow MADs to be received through such a VF. > > > > > > I think that is only true of mlx4, mlx5 allows receive, AFAIK > > > > > > I don't know if registering a mad agent fails though. Jack? > > > > According to internal mlx5 specification, MAD is fully operational for > > every Virtual HCA used to connect such virtual devices to IBTA > > virtualization spec. > > > > "Each PCI function (PF or VF) represents a vHCA. Each vHCA virtual port > > is mapped to an InfiniBand vport. The mapping is arbitrary and determined > > by the device, as the InfiniBand management is agnostic to it (the > > InfiniBand specification has no notion of hosts or PCI functions)." > > > > Most probably the observed by Bart behaviour is related to the fact that > > vport0 has special meaning to allow legacy SMs to connect. > > Hi Jason and Leon, > > Is it essential that we figure out which HCAs support MADs for VFs or is it > perhaps sufficient that I change the description of this patch such that it > mentions that device management and MAD support is not guaranteed to be > available? I have no idea, sorry. > > Thanks, > > Bart. >
