[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ccceac68-db4f-77a3-500d-12f60a8a1354@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 11:38:52 -0800
From: Rao Shoaib <rao.shoaib@...cle.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc: monis@...lanox.com, dledford@...hat.com, sean.hefty@...el.com,
hal.rosenstock@...il.com, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Introduce maximum WQE size to check limits
Any update on my patch?
If there is some change needed please let me know.
Shoaib
On 11/19/19 4:08 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 03:55:35PM -0800, Rao Shoaib wrote:
>
>> My intent is that we calculate and use the maximum buffer size using the
>> maximum of, number of SGE's and inline data requested, not controlling the
>> size of WQE buffer. If I was trying to limit WQE size I would agree with
>> you. Defining MAX_WQE_SIZE based on MAX_SGE and recalculating MAX_SGE does
>> not make sense to me. MAX_SGE and inline_data are independent variables and
>> define the size of wqe size not the other wise around. I did make
>> inline_dependent on MAX_SGE.
> What you are trying to do is limit the size of the WQE to some maximum
> and from there you can compute the upper limit on the SGE and the
> inline data arrays, depending on how the WQE is being used.
>
> If a limit must be had then the limit is the WQE size. It is also
> reasonable to ask why rxe has a limit at all, or why the limit is so
> small ie why can't it be 2k or something? But that is something else
>
> Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists