[ofa-general] question regarding umad_recv

[Sean Hefty]

>Seems you don't think it is very critical, cannot say I disagree so much.
>Hmm, let's change portid -> fd and depreciate umad_get_fd() after OFED?

My vote is to retain some sort of abstraction.  Once we get rid of it, it will
be very hard to add it back in.

My concern is that multi-thread receive handling isn't easily supported when
RMPP is involved, and having umad_recv take an abstract 'id' gives us some
flexibility that could come in useful someday.

E.g. something like:
umad_recv() -> returns too small, gives necessary size + id specific to a mad
uamd_recv(mad id, new size ...) -> returns reassembled rmpp mad

would allow multiple threads to block for receives, with only one needing to
deal with the rmpp mad.

- Sean