[openib-general] [PATCH v3 0/6] Tranport Neutral Verbs Proposal.

[James Lentini]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Krishna Kumar2 wrote:

> Hi James,
> 
> Sorry for the late response, my system was down and I just got it fixed.
> 
> > Is there a benefit to having rdmav_create_qp() take generic 
> > parameters if the application needs to understand the type of QP (IB, 
> > iWARP, etc.) created and the transport specific communication manager 
> > calls that are needed to manipulate it?
> > 
> > Would it make more sense if the QP create command was also transport 
> > specific?
> 
> My opinion is that the create_qp taking generic parameters is 
> correct, only subsequent calls may need to use transport specific 
> calls/arguments. Infact rdma_create_qp uses the ibv_create_qp (now 
> changed to rdmav_create_qp) call internally.

If you want to have a generic rdmav_create_qp() call, there needs to 
be programmatic way for the API consumer to determine what type of QP 
(iWARP vs. IB) was created.

I don't see any way to do that in your patch:

http://openib.org/pipermail/openib-general/2006-August/024605.html

> PS : What is the opinion on this patchset ?

I like the new approach you are taking (keeping 1 verbs library and 
adding rdmav_ symbol names). This change to transport neutral names is 
long overdue.

When you finish with the userspace APIs, I hope you will update the 
kernel APIs as well.