<html><body>
<p><tt>openib-general-bounces@openib.org wrote on 10/19/2005 01:37:14 PM:<br>
<br>
> On Tue, 2005-10-18 at 18:40, Kevin Reilly wrote:<br>
> > <br>
> > <br>
> > On Mon, 2005-10-18 at 10:07, Kevin Reilly wrote:<br>
> > >On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 10:07, Hal Rosenstock wrote:<br>
> > >> > Should this code work, because it seems that out_dev is a kernel<br>
> > >> > address (platform: PPC64) which cannot accessed by a userspace<br>
> > >> > program. Via GDB I can see that rt has the following content:<br>
> > >> ><br>
> > >> > The address is rt->out_dev = 0xc0000000cffaa800 which looks like a<br>
> > >> > kernel address.<br>
> > >><br>
> > >> Yes, this is a bug which has been previously pointed out on the list and<br>
> > >> not fixed.<br>
> > ><br>
> > >The fix for this involves an ABI change: it should return the GID of the<br>
> > >outgoing IB device.<br>
> > ><br>
> > >-- Hal<br>
> > <br>
> > Should we (IBM) work on submitting a patch for this?<br>
> <br>
> That's up to you.<br>
> <br>
> > Returning the GID or the device_name would be good fix.<br>
> <br>
> Yes, either of these could be made to work.<br>
> <br>
> > I guess our reluctance is that we've heard the this address translation<br>
> > library function might be depreciated for another interface?<br>
> <br>
> Yes, that has been my reluctance as well. It appears AT is likely to be<br>
> superceeded by CMA.<br>
> </tt><br>
<br>
<tt>Is there a ballpark estimate (or a plan) of when CMA willl be ready? Estimates like by end of Q4 2005</tt><br>
<tt>or end of Q1 2006 will help us make some decisions if we should submit a patch for this bug or wait</tt><br>
<tt>for CMA.</tt><br>
<br>
<br>
<tt>Pradeep</tt><br>
<tt>pradeep@us.ibm.com</tt></body></html>