[openib-general] [PATCHv2][RFC] kDAPL: use cm timers instead of own
mshefty at ichips.intel.com
Wed Jun 8 09:13:51 PDT 2005
Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 11:44, James Lentini wrote:
>>We interpreted the above to mean "give the connection protocol as
>>much time as it needs to establish a connection, but don't mask
>>errors (no path to the remove node, etc.)". For that reason we changed
>>the variable name to DAT_TIMEOUT_MAX.
> But if the REQ is lost, the timeout is really really long (longer than
> most will wait for an error). Transaction test also appears to be using
> this as well as the quit test.
My interpretation was that this is a DAPL level timeout and did not
necessarily relate to a timeout for a single CM REQ. That is, there could
still be a different timeout specified to the CM, but the number of retries
could be infinite.
Note that I'm not saying that an infinite timeout makes sense, but the use
of TIMEOUT_MAX seems reasonable. To me that indicates that DAPL decides how
long is needed to establish a timeout, and it manages all retries.
More information about the general