[openib-general] ib_mad.h: ib_mad_reg_req question

[Hal Rosenstock]

On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 15:13, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > There are 2 SM classes: one for direct routed and the other for LID
> > routed. Should these be handled separately (requiring 2 registrations
> > for a client to get them all) or treated "special" and allow one
> > registration to get them ?
> 
> > To me, this is a 2 part question:
> > 1. Is there ever a need to get just one of these classes ? (I don't
> > think so but want to be sure...)
> 
> Well, it's impossible to predict what users might want to do, so we
> should never say never.  In fact I can imagine an SM that wants to
> split the directed route discovery into a different process/thread
> from LID routed MAD handling, and I don't see a good reason to force a
> client like this to do the splitting between DR and LR MADs when the
> core MAD layer could do it perfectly well.
> 
> > 2. If not, then is it acceptable to muddy the interface this way ?
> 
> I think the gain (client saves one registration call) is minimal, and
> is outweighed by the loss in flexibility.  Also, I think the confusion
> generated by having a "magic" interface where one class acts
> differently from all other classes probably makes it not worth it to
> people who would use the interface.
> 
> So I guess my vote on this feature would be "no" :)

Thanks. I'm convinced this is not worth it.

-- Hal