[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180326121138.00005e30@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 12:11:38 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
CC: Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
<linux-block@...r.kernel.org>, Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>,
"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@....de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>,
Max Gurtovoy <maxg@...lanox.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
"Benjamin Herrenschmidt" <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Eric Wehage <Eric.Wehage@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/11] PCI/P2PDMA: Support peer-to-peer memory
On Tue, 13 Mar 2018 10:43:55 -0600
Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com> wrote:
> On 12/03/18 09:28 PM, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> > On 3/12/2018 3:35 PM, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
> > Regarding the switch business, It is amazing how much trouble you went into
> > limit this functionality into very specific hardware.
> >
> > I thought that we reached to an agreement that code would not impose
> > any limits on what user wants.
> >
> > What happened to all the emails we exchanged?
>
> It turns out that root ports that support P2P are far less common than
> anyone thought. So it will likely have to be a white list.
This came as a bit of a surprise to our PCIe architect.
His follow up was whether it was worth raising an ECR for the PCIe spec
to add a capability bit to allow this to be discovered. This might
long term avoid the need to maintain the white list for new devices.
So is it worth having a long term solution for making this discoverable?
Jonathan
> Nobody else
> seems keen on allowing the user to enable this on hardware that doesn't
> work. The easiest solution is still limiting it to using a switch. From
> there, if someone wants to start creating a white-list then that's
> probably the way forward to support root ports.
>
> And there's also the ACS problem which means if you want to use P2P on
> the root ports you'll have to disable ACS on the entire system. (Or
> preferably, the IOMMU groups need to get more sophisticated to allow for
> dynamic changes).
>
> Additionally, once you allow for root ports you may find the IOMMU
> getting in the way.
>
> So there are great deal more issues to sort out if you don't restrict to
> devices behind switches.
>
> Logan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists