[ofa-general] Re: Re: [PATCH draft, untested] ehca srq emulation (for IPoIB CM)

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

> Since SRQ is not a required function in the IB spec we never addressed that
> issue in the RFC along with UC.
>
> ...

Since SRQ is almost transparent wire-protocol-wise, RFC probably does not have
to say anything about it. But I wonder why do you say this about UC which is
explicitly documented in the spec.

> If you really want to start splitting up which layer has part of the decision
> on how to connect, then you need to propose a totally different RFC.
>
> ...

I hear an architect speaking :)
You seem to use the term layer in the OSI model sense, while Roland is just
speaking about code organisation.  We haven't stopped developing ipoib, so
duplicating the controlling logic is a problem for us: both performance and
maintainance wise.  Abstracting the SRQ/nonSRQ issue out, by implementing a set
of functions that can work on top of either SRQ or a pool of QPs is the proposed
solution.

-- 
MST