[ewg] [PATCH v4] IB Core: RAW ETH support

Steve Wise swise at opengridcomputing.com
Wed Jun 16 07:09:59 PDT 2010


Roland Dreier wrote:
>  > I tested it before on the Roland tree ( iboe branch ) and it fails,
>  > because it writen in the way suitable for OFED. If adapt the patch to
>  > the Roland tree, then appling Mellanox OFED patches will fail, because
>  > it changes the same functions in the code.
>  > Here is one example:
>  > Look at __mlx4_ib_modify_qp at the Roland tree - there is no RAW_ETY
>  > support. But in the OFED version of the same function this support is
>  > present.
>  > RAW_ETH patch modify this function and looking for RAW_ETY word and
>  > without this RAW_ETH Mellanox patch will fail.
>
> Don't take this too personally -- I picked a semi-random email in this
> thread to reply to; this is pretty broadly targeted.
>
> <rant>
>
> What the hell is the thinking behind introducing IB_QPT_RAW_ETH?  You're
> inserting an enum value before IB_QPT_RAW_ETY, so any old userspace
> passing in IB_QPT_RAW_ETY will silently get different behavior depending
> on the kernel version.  And you're creating two constands that differ in
> a single letter (IB_QPT_RAW_ETY vs. IB_QPT_RAW_ETH).  How are you going
> to explain that to users?  How is anyone ever going to get it right?
> For that matter, what exactly does IB_QPT_RAW_ETH mean?
>
> This all seems to be a symptom of how broken our development process
> is.  Yes, unfortunately I can't spend as much time reviewing and
> applying patches as I might like, and I apologize for that.  But if we
> have all the RDMA developers piling up shit in their little area and
> then sending it on to be merged as soon as it kind of works, without
> thinking about design or maintainability and without ever doing any
> review, then I'm always going to have an expanding review backlog.
>
> And then we have OFED compounding problems -- "Oh that's a nice pile of
> shit you've built there.  We better ship it to users while it's still
> steaming."  How about if OFED developers take a little time to think
> things through?
>
> </rant>
>
> In other words, can someone explain the plan for this raw QP stuff to me?
>
>  - R.
>   


It doesn't even look like this patch and the mlx4 patch were ever posted 
to linux-rdma. Only to the EWG list.

Granted our dev process may not be documented, but I always assumed the 
general idea was to get changes accepted upstream, then pull into ofed. 
OFED is just a mechanism to make top-of-tree linux work on distro 
kernels. There are some exceptions, but this stuff shouldn't be an 
exception.

We should all follow this "upstream first" process IMO.

Steve.





More information about the ewg mailing list