On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 06:15:52PM +0300, Oded Gabbay wrote: > I'm sorry, but you won't be able to convince me here that I need to > "enslave" my entire code to RDMA, just because my ASIC "also" has some > RDMA ports. You can't recreate common shared subsystems in a driver just because you don't want to work with the subsystem. I don't care what else the ASIC has. In Linux the netdev part is exposed through netdev, the RDMA part through RDMA, the totally-not-a-GPU part through drivers/misc. It is always been this way. Chelsio didn't get to rebuild the SCSI stack in their driver just because "storage is a small part of their device" Drivers are not allowed to re-implement I2C/SPI/etc without re-using the comon code for that just because "I2C is a small part of their device" Exposing to userspace the creation of RoCE QPs and their related objects are unambiguously a RDMA subsystem task. I don't even know how you think you can argue it is not. It is your company proudly claiming the device has 100G RoCE ports in all the marketing literature, after all. It is too bad the device has a non-standards compliant implementation of RoCE so this will be a bit hard for you. Oh well. Jason
