[openib-general] matching an RMPP NACK to send or receive?

[Eitan Zahavi]

I was referring to the way TID is built only to say that TID made by the
kernel should try and use some way to identify kernel A from kernel B.
If a TID is built out of PID and sequential number then using a TID with PID
prefix of zero for Kernel generated transaction would cause more TID
collisions. 

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Sean Hefty [mailto:mshefty at ichips.intel.com] 
Sent:	Friday, July 15, 2005 12:02 AM
To:	Eitan Zahavi
Cc:	'Sean Hefty'; openib-general at openib.org
Subject:	Re: [openib-general] matching an RMPP NACK to send or
receive?

Eitan Zahavi wrote:
> EZ: TID should consist of a client selected part and process ID. For
kernels
> I would select some part of the GUID too.
> We need to minimize cases of same TID use. But in such case - abort both
of
> them.

I don't think that the receive handling code should make any assumptions 
about the format of the TID.  Aborting both transactions seems a little 
harsh, but not sure if there's another way.  For now, the code will only 
abort a send, which should be the more common case.  I will need to add 
aborting receives later and assume that actual TID collisions would be 
extremely rare.

The RMPP status does help indicate whether a send or receive is being 
aborted, but not in all cases.

- Sean
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/general/attachments/20050715/a89039ce/attachment.html>