[openib-general] comments on DAT registry in OpenIB

[James Lentini]

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Roland Dreier wrote:

>    Robert> I think that your suggestion to s/DAT/RDMA makes sense,
>    Robert> since this code is quickly becoming "the" RDMA transport
>    Robert> independent interface for Linux, rather than trying to
>    Robert> RNIC-PI unionize the IB core layer to make it support both
>    Robert> IB and iWarp.
>
> I disagree.  It doesn't make sense to me for us to add an abstraction
> layer on top of another abstraction layer -- let's just fix the first
> abstraction layer.
>
> If we follow the approach of changing the name of DAT to RDMA and then
> putting it in the kernel, we end up with a stack that looks like:
>
>    upper layer protocol <-> RDMA midlayer <-> IB RDMA provider <-> IB midlayer <-> IB low-level driver

I'd note that the RDMA midlayer above is very thin (plus or minus 1000 
lines for headers and source files).

>
> Let's just evolve the IB midlayer so the picture can be more sensible:
>
>    upper layer protocol <-> RDMA midlayer <-> IB low-level driver
>
> - R.
> _______________________________________________
> openib-general mailing list
> openib-general at openib.org
> http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
>
> To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
>