[openib-general] RE: [dat-discussions] comments on DAT registry in OpenIB

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 08:40:12AM -0700, Tom Duffy wrote:
> I have no problem with there being a header file with allows for source
> compatibility.  This header would be maintained by OpenIB, but never
> included in upstream.  I think James has a start of such a header called
> kdat.h.  It needs a bunch more to make it follow the DAT conventions.

I don't think it makes a lot of sense to maintain that header.  If you
want to evolve the dat code into something that's acceptable as an
RDMA layer for kernel inclusion it will need to change a lot, and that
changes will be rather fundamental to some of the design principles.

That doesn't mean you can't add that as a DAT provider again if you
care enough, but that'll be much more than a simple header file.