[openib-general] Re: uverbs comp events

[Michael Krause]

At 11:11 AM 8/19/2005, Roland Dreier wrote:
>     Arlin> Yes, this is certainly another option; albeit one that
>     Arlin> requires more system resources. Why not take full advantage
>     Arlin> of the FD resource we already have? It's your call, but
>     Arlin> uDAPL and other multi-thread applications could make good
>     Arlin> use of a wakeup feature with these event interfaces. An
>     Arlin> event model that allows users to create events and get
>     Arlin> events but requires them to use side band mechanisms to
>     Arlin> trigger the event seems incomplete to me.
>
>I disagree.  Right now the CQ FD is a pretty clean concept: you read
>CQ events out of it.  If you want to trigger a CQ event, then you
>could post a work request to a QP that generates a completion event.
>Adding a new system call for queuing synthetic events seems like
>growing an ugly wart to me.
>
>If we look at the analogous design of a multi-threaded network server,
>where a thread might block waiting for input on a socket, we see that
>there's no system call to inject synthetic data into a network socket.
>
>I'd rather fix the uDAPL design instead of adding ugliness to the
>kernel to work around it.

Please take a look at the Sockets API Extensions standard that was 
published quite awhile back to insure that the infrastructure can support 
this API as well.  The API was developed by a set of Sockets developers and 
addresses a number of concerns for async communications, event management, 
explicit memory management, etc.  It is also well suited to have SDP 
transparently implemented underneath it.

Mike 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/general/attachments/20050822/5d663f3f/attachment.html>