[Rdma-developers] RE: [openib-general] OpenIB and OpenRDMA: Convergence on commonRDMA APIs and ULPs for Linux

[Tom Duffy]

On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 09:55 -0700, Caitlin Bestler wrote:
> There isn't enough there to go farther.
> 
> What methods is the RDMA_DEVICE_RNIC required to support?
> 
> a) Totally iWARP specific methods. That works, but all you've done
>    is taken two stacks and put a switch on top of them. kDAPL already
>    does that quite well.
> b) The same methods, but with different struct and enum definitions?
>    (i.e., a struct iwarp_qp versus a struct ib_qp). IMHO, that doesn't
>    differ much from a)
> c) The same methods but with struct/enums that have common and transport
>    specific portions? That is doable, in fact that is what RNIC-PI is
>    today. Repeating that work with the gen2 verbs will be time
> consuming.
>    I don't want to have to wait 4 months to debate the details of this
>    before I can start working on my next generation of verbs.
> d) Use the methods and structs 'as is' and just somehow figure out how
>    they map to iWARP? That is no more "transport neutral" than Tom DeLay
>    is "bipartisan".

I think a combination of c) and d) will be the fastest time to kernel.

Oh, and please stop waiting and debating.  Code speaks much louder than
words.

-tduffy
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/general/attachments/20050527/1cdabf81/attachment.sig>