Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 for-next 00/12] Add network namespace support in the RDMA-CM

From: Haggai Eran <haggaie-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 13:07:34 +0300

On 28/05/2015 18:46, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 04:22:36PM +0300, Haggai Eran wrote:
>> wouldn't care if they share the "QP number namespace", etc. RDMA CM
>> ports are different because they are chosen by the applications, but
>> they map directly to the network namespace, so they don't require their
>> own namespace.
> 
> Different containers should have restricted access to the PKey and GID
> tables, and the presence device itself. Just like in the SRIOV
> case.
> 
> That is what the 'RDMA Namespace' would control.

We were thinking here that there is a room for an RDMA cgroup. It would
limit the amount of RDMA resources a container can use. It can also be
used for the restrictions you mentioned, but maybe they are more
suitable for a namespace. I'm not sure. In RoCE for instance, a
restricted access to the GID table can be derived from the network
namespace directly, but perhaps not in InfiniBand.

Regards,
Haggai
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to [email-masked]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html