[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230926120903.GD92403@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2023 20:09:03 +0800
From: Dust Li <dust.li@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
Alexandra Winter <wintera@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Albert Huang <huangjie.albert@...edance.com>,
Karsten Graul <kgraul@...ux.ibm.com>,
Wenjia Zhang <wenjia@...ux.ibm.com>,
Jan Karcher <jaka@...ux.ibm.com>,
"D. Wythe" <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Tony Lu <tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Wen Gu <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
RDMA mailing list <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net/smc: add support for netdevice in
containers.
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 02:41:04PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 01:14:04PM +0200, Alexandra Winter wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 26.09.23 12:48, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>> > This patch made me wonder, why doesn't SMC use RDMA-CM like all other
>> > in-kernel ULPs which work over RDMA?
>> >
>> > Thanks
>>
>> The idea behind SMC is that it should look an feel to the applications
>> like TCP sockets. So for connection management it uses TCP over IP;
>> RDMA is just used for the data transfer.
>
>I think that it is not different from other ULPs. For example, RDS works
>over sockets and doesn't touch or reimplement GID management logic.
I think the difference is SMC socket need to be compatible with TCP
socket, so it need a tcp socket to fallback when something is not working.
If SMC works with rdmacm, it still need a fallback-to-tcp socket, and
the tcp connection has to be established for each SMC socket before the
SMC socket got established, that would make rdmacm meaningless.
Best regards,
Dust
>
>Thanks
Powered by blists - more mailing lists