[openib-general][PATCH][RFC]: CMA IB implementation

[Guy German]

Sean Hefty wrote:
> Guy German wrote:
> 
>> I don't think this layer should replace ib_at. If you think there are 
>> things to be fixed in the ib_at, I suggest we fix them. I do believe 
>> that the original purpose of this generic cm was to serve ulps that 
>> don't want to be transport oriented (e.g. iSER).
> 
> 
> Based on discussions from last month, the general agreement was to use 
> CM private data in place of ATS.  Once that's done, I don't see a need 
> for ib_at. (Also, put simply, I don't believe that ATS can work.)  I 
> think that a combination of what Roland, including his original API 
> design, and Yaron proposed is the right direction to go.

ib_at works also with ipoib. The current way my cma implementation is using it, 
for instance, does not use ATS at all.
The way I see it, ib_at is an address resolution module for Infiniband (that can 
probably be improved) and the cma should be a generic connection manager for 
rdma transports.

Guy