[openib-general] RFD: uverbs and hotplug

[Caitlin Bestler]

On 5/3/05, Tom Duffy <tduffy at sun.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 09:42 -0700, Caitlin Bestler wrote:
> > Most applications are not written to be able to
> > survice a sudden loss of virtually all of its connections, and then resume
> > all of the suspended sessions with new connections using new memory
> > regions.
> 
> Most applications *should* be written this way.  Especially since more
> and more people are using unreliable networks (wifi, 3G, etc.).  I can
> see a day where we have RDMA-capable wireless adapters in which case
> applications will have to be written with the possibility of a sudden
> loss taken into account.
> 
> -tduffy
> 
And applications should be prepared for file systems to fail as well,
but that doesn't mean that the file system shouldn't consider features
such as journaling that minimize how often the application will be
faced that sort of problem.

It would certainly be valid to decide that the effort was not worthwhile
given the effort required. But such a decision should be made with
full awareness that the notice will enable very few applications to
actually recover when an entire HCA is taken down. If the goal
is to realistically allow applications to confinue functioning after
the loss of multiple ports some more powerful hooks are required.