[openib-general] [PATCH v3 0/6] Tranport Neutral Verbs Proposal.

[Tom Tucker]

On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 10:20 -0400, James Lentini wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Krishna Kumar2 wrote:
> 
> > Hi James,
> > 
> > Sorry for the late response, my system was down and I just got it fixed.
> > 
> > > Is there a benefit to having rdmav_create_qp() take generic 
> > > parameters if the application needs to understand the type of QP (IB, 
> > > iWARP, etc.) created and the transport specific communication manager 
> > > calls that are needed to manipulate it?
> > > 
> > > Would it make more sense if the QP create command was also transport 
> > > specific?
> > 
> > My opinion is that the create_qp taking generic parameters is 
> > correct, only subsequent calls may need to use transport specific 
> > calls/arguments. Infact rdma_create_qp uses the ibv_create_qp (now 
> > changed to rdmav_create_qp) call internally.
> 
> If you want to have a generic rdmav_create_qp() call, there needs to 
> be programmatic way for the API consumer to determine what type of QP 
> (iWARP vs. IB) was created.
> 
> I don't see any way to do that in your patch:

I think the QP is associated with the transport type indirectly through
the context. It can be queried with ibv_get_transport_type verb.  A
renamed rdma_get_transport type would probably suffice.

> 
> http://openib.org/pipermail/openib-general/2006-August/024605.html
> 
> > PS : What is the opinion on this patchset ?
> 
> I like the new approach you are taking (keeping 1 verbs library and 
> adding rdmav_ symbol names). This change to transport neutral names is 
> long overdue.
> 
> When you finish with the userspace APIs, I hope you will update the 
> kernel APIs as well.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openib-general mailing list
> openib-general at openib.org
> http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
> 
> To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
>