[openib-general] Re: [PATCH] [CMA] RDMA CM abstraction module

[Michael Krause]

At 12:13 PM 10/10/2005, Fab Tillier wrote:
> > From: Sean Hefty [mailto:mshefty at ichips.intel.com]
> > Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 11:16 AM
> >
> > Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > Maybe rdma_connection (these things encapsulate connectin state)?
> > > Or, rdma_sock or rdma_socket, since people are used to the fact that
> > > connections are sockets?
> >
> > Any objection to rdma_socket?
>
>I don't like rdma_socket, since you can't actually perform any I/O 
>operations on
>the rdma_socket, unlike normal sockets.  We're dealing only with the 
>connection
>part of the problem, and the name should reflect that.  So rdma_connection,
>rdma_conn, or rdma_cid seem more appropriate.

Naming should not involve sockets as that is part of existing 
standards.  There are also the new standard Sockets extension API available 
today that might be extended sometime in the future to include explicit 
RDMA support should people decide to bypass SDP and go straight to a more 
robust API definition.  The Sockets Extensions already comprehend explicit 
memory management, async comms, etc. making a significant improvement over 
the existing sync Sockets as well as going further in solving areas like 
memory management beyond what was done in Winsocks.

Mike 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/general/attachments/20051010/a387a62e/attachment.html>