[openib-general] RE: [Openib-windows] RE: IBDM and IBMgtSim Proposal Comments

[Hal Rosenstock]

On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 16:43, Fab Tillier wrote:
> > From: Hal Rosenstock [mailto:halr at voltaire.com]

> How is porting umad any different than using the OSM vendor layer?

See below.

> umad is the lowest level API in Linux, but not in Windows.  So either the diagnostics
> interface to the lowest level layer (umad for Linux, IBAL for Windows), or the
> diagnostics interface to some higher abstraction layer.  If a higher abstraction
> layer, why not use the existing OSM vendor layer and skip porting umad to
> Windows all together?

In Linux, OSM vendor layer is implemented on top of umad. Whether it is
a higher abstraction layer is another matter. It is an abstraction with
different semantics and may be higher as I am not sure whether the umad
and mad libraries could be put on top of the OSM vendor layer but the
other way 'round works.

I looked at IBAL some time ago but can't comment now on how it compares.

So it appears there are 3 choices:
1. Port OpenIB Linux libraries to Windows and OpenIB Linux "diags" port
as well (second part is less work than next alternative)
2. Port OpenIB Linux diagnostics to OSM vendor layer
3. No OpenIB "Linux" diagnostics in the windows environment

-- Hal