[openib-general] [PATCH 3/5 v3] 2.6.20 rdma/cma: allow early transition to RTS to handle lost CM messages

[Or Gerlitz]

Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> I think we all already agreed we need the rdma_established call,
> for reasons that you outline. So I am not arguing at all - I was just
> checking that REP re-sends are implemented.

Yes, and its not "the rdma_established call" but "an rdma_established" 
call. Sean has changed the name to cm_notify and rdma_notify as it 
merges within the framework of other ULP to CMA/CM notifications eg 
those related to path migration.

  > So, a slightly more exact description for the patch would be
> "to handle the case where a data packet bypasses an RTU".
> Is that right?

Yes.

Or.