[openib-general] IB CM and the case of the lost RTU: was a bunch of other topics...

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

Quoting r. Sean Hefty <mshefty at ichips.intel.com>:
> Subject: IB CM and the case of the lost RTU: was a bunch of other topics...
> 
> Or Gerlitz wrote:
> > Indeed, lets see if we can get some input from the ULP people working on 
> > passive side / targets (eg NFS/Lustre/iSER/SDP).
> 
> To recap (since it's been a couple of weeks), we have two general solutions for 
> how to support the passive/server/target side of a connection:
> 
> 1. One method requires that the passive side queue send WRs until they get a 
> connection establish event.
> 
> 2. An alternative allows sending immediately after receiving a response, but may 
> require the user to manually transition the connection to established.  Failure 
> to do so will cause the connection to tear down if the RTU is never received 
> (even after retries).
> 
> Without target developer input, I'm guessing at the right solution.  But my 
> expectation is that it is likely that the passive side will process receive 
> completions before the connection is established, but highly unlikely that the 
> RTU will never be received in this case.

I think SDP would simply queue receive WRs
and never send any WRs until established event.

-- 
MST