[PATCH v3 net-next 07/21] nvme-tcp: Add DDP data-path

[Sagi Grimberg]

>>>> Given how much ddp code there is can you split it into a separate file?
>>>
>>> mmm, do we need to check the preferences or get to a consensus among
>>> the maintainers for that one?
>>
>> Not sure if moving it would be better here. Given that the ddp code is
>> working directly on nvme-tcp structs we'll need a new shared header
>> file..
>>
>> Its possible to do, but I'm not sure the end result will be better..
> 
> In the end its your code base.  But I hate having all this offload
> cruft all over the place.

I know, I think that the folks did a solid job consolidating it
given the complexity. But looking at the code again, it is sprinkled
more than I'd like it to be. I think it can be better with a little
more work.

If we can get to a point where we have all the specific logic
moved to dedicated routines and just a few interceptions on
the main flows we should be ok.

> Just saying no to offloads might be an even better position, though.

:)

I've heard complaints about nvme-tcp taking more cpu cycles than
nvme-rdma (well duh..) so I'm not opposed to having mainstream devices
offering offload capabilities to help out with that, not at all.