[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240617142435.GC791043@ziepe.ca>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 11:24:35 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc: Jianbo Liu <jianbol@...dia.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next 2/3] IB/mlx5: Create UMR QP just before first
reg_mr occurs
On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 09:06:00PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 02:30:03PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 01:26:38PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > From: Jianbo Liu <jianbol@...dia.com>
> > >
> > > UMR QP is not used in some cases, so move QP and its CQ creations from
> > > driver load flow to the time first reg_mr occurs, that is when MR
> > > interfaces are first called.
> >
> > We use UMR for kernel MRs too, don't we?
>
> Strange, I know that I answered to this email, but I don't see it in the ML.
>
> As far as I checked, we are not. Did I miss something?
Maybe not, but maybe we should be using UMR there..
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists