If you require more details on how this all works - it was fully explored
in the IETF RDDP workgroup - may I suggest a reading of the RDMA Security
Considerations draft which goes through many of the issues on how one
relates to a host stack. This complements the MPA spec and supports much
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 11:51:40AM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Almost - except the case about where those skbs are coming from?
> > It looks like they are obtained from network, since it is ethernet
> > driver, and if they match some set of rules, they are considered as valid
On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 20:26 +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 10:47:25AM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > > And if there were a dataflow between addr/port a.b to addr/port c.d
> > > already, it will either terminated?
> > >
> > > Considering the following
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 08:26:49PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 10:47:25AM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > > And if there were a dataflow between addr/port a.b to addr/port c.d
> > > already, it will either terminated?
> > >
> >
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 10:47:25AM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > And if there were a dataflow between addr/port a.b to addr/port c.d
> > already, it will either terminated?
> >
> > Considering the following sequence:
> > handlers->t3c_handlers->sched()->work_queue->work_handlers
> Is there really no way to only keep the actual hw infiniband there, move
> iwarp/rdma drivers in drivers/net/something/ and the core stuff in
> net/something/ ?
It's definitely possible, but rearranging the source tree hasn't been
a high priority (for me at least).
- R.
-
To unsubscribe fro
On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 19:31 +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 10:12:42AM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > Ah. Data from an offloaded connection cannot leak into the main stack
> > nor vice-verse. We can take an active RDMA connection establishment as
> >
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 10:12:42AM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Ah. Data from an offloaded connection cannot leak into the main stack
> nor vice-verse. We can take an active RDMA connection establishment as
> an example if you want: Once the message is sent to the HW to "setup
On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 10:02 -0600, Steve Wise wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 11:45 +0100, Brice Goglin wrote:
> > Steve Wise wrote:
> > > There is no SW TCP stack in this driver. The HW supports RDMA over
> > > TCP/IP/10GbE in HW and this is required for zero-copy RDMA over Ethernet
> > > (aka iWA
On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 10:12 -0600, Steve Wise wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 18:59 +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 09:39:58AM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > wrote:
> > > > Phrases like "MPA-aware TCP" rises a lot of questions - briefly saying
> > > > that hard
On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 18:59 +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 09:39:58AM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > > Phrases like "MPA-aware TCP" rises a lot of questions - briefly saying
> > > that hardware (even if it is called ethernet driver) can create and work
On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 11:45 +0100, Brice Goglin wrote:
> Steve Wise wrote:
> > There is no SW TCP stack in this driver. The HW supports RDMA over
> > TCP/IP/10GbE in HW and this is required for zero-copy RDMA over Ethernet
> > (aka iWARP). The device is a 10 GbE device, not Infiniband.
>
> Then,
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 09:39:58AM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Phrases like "MPA-aware TCP" rises a lot of questions - briefly saying
> > that hardware (even if it is called ethernet driver) can create and work
> > with own TCP flows potentially modified in the way it likes whi
On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 18:27 +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 09:14:36AM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > Chelsio doesn't implement TCP stack in the driver. Just like Ammasso,
> > it sends messages to the HW to setup connections. It differs from
> > Ammas
On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 18:19 +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 09:02:05AM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > > > > This and a lot of other changes in this driver definitely says you
> > > > > implement your own stack of protocols on top of infiniband hardwar
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 09:14:36AM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Chelsio doesn't implement TCP stack in the driver. Just like Ammasso,
> it sends messages to the HW to setup connections. It differs from
> Ammasso in at least 2 ways:
>
> 1) Ammasso does the MPA negotiations in FW
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 09:02:05AM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > > This and a lot of other changes in this driver definitely says you
> > > > implement your own stack of protocols on top of infiniband hardware.
> > >
> > > ...but I do know this driver is for 10-gig ethernet
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 21:27 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > So will each new NIC implement some parts of TCP stack in theirs drivers?
>
> I hope not. The driver we merged (amso1100) did it completely in FW,
> with a separate MAC and IP interface for the RDMA connections. I
> think we better und
On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 08:13 +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 10:20:51AM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > > > This and a lot of other changes in this driver definitely says you
> > > > implement your own stack of protocols on top of infiniband hardware.
>
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 21:13 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > It is for iwarp/rdma from description.
>
> Yes, iWARP on top of 10G ethernet.
>
> > If it is 10ge, then why does it parse incomping packet headers and
> > implements initial tcp state machine?
>
> To establish connections to run RDMA
On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 08:07 +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 07:45:52AM -0800, Roland Dreier ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > > This and a lot of other changes in this driver definitely says you
> > > implement your own stack of protocols on top of infiniband hardware.
>
Steve Wise wrote:
> There is no SW TCP stack in this driver. The HW supports RDMA over
> TCP/IP/10GbE in HW and this is required for zero-copy RDMA over Ethernet
> (aka iWARP). The device is a 10 GbE device, not Infiniband.
Then, I wonder why the driver goes in drivers/infiniband/ :)
Is there r
> So will each new NIC implement some parts of TCP stack in theirs drivers?
I hope not. The driver we merged (amso1100) did it completely in FW,
with a separate MAC and IP interface for the RDMA connections. I
think we better understand the Chelsio driver pretty well and think it
over carefully
On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 09:13:59PM -0800, Roland Dreier ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> > It is for iwarp/rdma from description.
>
> Yes, iWARP on top of 10G ethernet.
>
> > If it is 10ge, then why does it parse incomping packet headers and
> > implements initial tcp state machine?
>
> To estab
> It is for iwarp/rdma from description.
Yes, iWARP on top of 10G ethernet.
> If it is 10ge, then why does it parse incomping packet headers and
> implements initial tcp state machine?
To establish connections to run RDMA over, I guess. iWARP is RDMA
over TCP.
- R.
-
To unsubscribe from th
On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 10:20:51AM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > This and a lot of other changes in this driver definitely says you
> > > implement your own stack of protocols on top of infiniband hardware.
> >
> > ...but I do know this driver is for 10-gig ethernet HW.
> >
On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 07:45:52AM -0800, Roland Dreier ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> > This and a lot of other changes in this driver definitely says you
> > implement your own stack of protocols on top of infiniband hardware.
>
> ...but I do know this driver is for 10-gig ethernet HW.
It is f
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 07:45 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > Could you convince network core developers that it is not own TCP
> > implementation which will mess with existing one?
>
> I'm not qualified to comment on this...
>
I don't understand your question?
> > This and a lot of other chan
> Could you convince network core developers that it is not own TCP
> implementation which will mess with existing one?
I'm not qualified to comment on this...
> This and a lot of other changes in this driver definitely says you
> implement your own stack of protocols on top of infiniband har
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 04:49:58PM -0600, Steve Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> +static int send_halfclose(struct iwch_ep *ep, gfp_t gfp)
> +{
> + struct cpl_close_con_req *req;
> + struct sk_buff *skb;
> +
> + PDBG("%s ep %p\n", __FUNCTION__, ep);
> + skb = get_skb(NULL, sizeof(*
30 matches
Mail list logo
