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

[James Lentini]

On Tue, 31 May 2005, Hal Rosenstock wrote:

> On Tue, 2005-05-31 at 15:57, James Lentini wrote:
>> If we included address resolution, how would we divide up the time
>> between address resolution and cm protocol? Wouldn't we have to
>> track how long address resolution took to complete?
>
> Yes, to follow the requirement closely, one would need to time the
> duration of the address translation but that is pretty straightforward
> to do. IBAT already has to time out requests anyway. The worst case for
> address resolution is currently 4 * 100 msec.

If we can account for all of the time properly, then we should 
implement it that way.

> Other alternatives are to subtract the maximal address translation 
> time off the time supplied and use the rest for CM, or as you said 
> ignore this time and use it all for CM purposes (and just go over by 
> whatever amount this is). Did other implementations factor this in 
> or did they ignore this ?