[openib-general] Re: Questions about libibat, ib_uat, and ib_a

[Pradeep Satyanarayana]

openib-general-bounces at openib.org wrote on 10/19/2005 01:37:14 PM:

> On Tue, 2005-10-18 at 18:40, Kevin Reilly wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 2005-10-18 at 10:07, Kevin Reilly wrote:
> > >On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 10:07, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> > >> > Should this code work, because it seems that out_dev is a kernel
> > >> > address (platform: PPC64) which cannot accessed  by a userspace
> > >> > program. Via GDB I can see that rt has the following content:
> > >> >
> > >> > The address is rt->out_dev = 0xc0000000cffaa800 which looks like a
> > >> > kernel address.
> > >>
> > >> Yes, this is a bug which has been previously pointed out on the list
and
> > >> not fixed.
> > >
> > >The fix for this involves an ABI change: it should return the GID of
the
> > >outgoing IB device.
> > >
> > >-- Hal
> >
> > Should we (IBM) work on submitting a patch for this?
>
> That's up to you.
>
> > Returning the GID or the device_name would be good fix.
>
> Yes, either of these could be made to work.
>
> > I guess our reluctance is that we've heard the this address translation
> > library function might be depreciated for another interface?
>
> Yes, that has been my reluctance as well. It appears AT is likely to be
> superceeded by CMA.
>

Is there a ballpark estimate (or a plan) of when CMA willl be ready?
Estimates like by end of Q4 2005
or end of Q1 2006 will help us make some decisions if we should submit a
patch for this bug or wait
for CMA.


Pradeep
pradeep at us.ibm.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/general/attachments/20051020/8fe52d81/attachment.html>