[openib-general] Re: RDMA CM and loopback addresses

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

Quoting r. Sean Hefty <sean.hefty at intel.com>:
> Subject: RE: RDMA CM and loopback addresses
> 
> >Hmm. This all sounds very reasonable, but if resolve_addr is
> >available, why not get rid of bind()? Do not provide any way
> >in the API for a non-listening socket to get the bound hardware device
> >without providing both source and dest.
> 
> This makes sense, and was the way the initial implementation was coded.
> 
> Support for bind() on the active side was added to support DAPL.  In fact,
> calling bind() doesn't even alleviate the need to call resolve_addr().
> 
> I will see if there's find a reasonable way to support DAPL without binding
> early to a device.
> 
> - Sean

SDP also needs this I think.

-- 
Michael S. Tsirkin
Staff Engineer, Mellanox Technologies