[openib-general] [PATCH] [CMA] support for SDP + standard protocol

[Sean Hefty]

>I understand that SDP needs address translation services as well as
>its own private data. However, I think it could be implemented using
>optional API functions that allow the ULP to modify the private data
>per its need, rather than adding ULP knowledge into CMA.
>As example, if ISER spec will be modified, or some new ULP
>implemented, that needed their own private data, we'll need to modify
>CMA again, as well as creating a dependency between CMA versions and
>ULPs.

The CMA must be aware of the format of the data in order to set and extract the
IP addressing information.  SDP and the new CMA format locate these in different
areas of the private data.  The CMA only defines the SDP hello header, and
restricts its definition to the location of the IP addresses, source port, and
version information.

If a ULP wants to define their own private data format and move the locations of
any of those fields, then yes, the CMA would need to be changed again.  But I
don't see how any API changes can prevent this, since the CMA must be able to
extract the data on the remote side.

- Sean