[openib-general] Re: Mellanox HCAs: outstanding RDMAs

[Talpey, Thomas]

At 08:56 AM 6/6/2006, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> The core spec does not require it. An implementation *may* enforce it,
>> but is not *required* to do so. And as pointed out in the other message,
>> there are repercussions of doing so.
>
>Interesting, I wasn't aware of such interpretation of the spec.
>When QP is modified to RTS, the initiator depth is passed to it, which
>suggests that the provider must obey, not ignore this parameter. No?

This is the difference between "may" and "must". The value is provided,
but I don't see anything in the spec that makes a requirement on its
enforcement. Table 107 says the consumer can query it, that's about
as close as it comes. There's some discussion about CM exchange too.

Don't forget about iWARP, btw.

Tom.