[openib-general] [PATCHv2][RFC] kDAPL: use cm timers instead of own

[James Lentini]

On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, Sean Hefty wrote:

> Hal Rosenstock wrote:
>> On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 11:44, James Lentini wrote:
>> 
>>> We interpreted the above to mean "give the connection protocol as much 
>>> time as it needs to establish a connection, but don't mask errors (no path 
>>> to the remove node, etc.)". For that reason we changed the variable name 
>>> to DAT_TIMEOUT_MAX.
>> 
>> 
>> But if the REQ is lost, the timeout is really really long (longer than
>> most will wait for an error). Transaction test also appears to be using
>> this as well as the quit test.
>
> My interpretation was that this is a DAPL level timeout and did not 
> necessarily relate to a timeout for a single CM REQ.  That is, there could 
> still be a different timeout specified to the CM, but the number of retries 
> could be infinite.

If there are kernel users in need of an truly inifinite timeout, we 
could do that.

> Note that I'm not saying that an infinite timeout makes sense, but the use of 
> TIMEOUT_MAX seems reasonable.  To me that indicates that DAPL decides how 
> long is needed to establish a timeout, and it manages all retries.
>
> - Sean
>