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

[Krishna Kumar2]

Hi Roland & Sean,

What is your opinion on this patch set ? Anything else needs to be done
for acceptance ?

Thanks,

- KK

openib-general-bounces at openib.org wrote on 08/16/2006 11:42:35 AM:

> Hi James,
> 
> Sorry for the delay, we had a long weekend.
> 
> > > > 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:
> > 
> > I think the QP is associated with the transport type indirectly 
through
> > the context. It can be queried with ibv_get_transport_type verb.  A
> > renamed rdma_get_transport type would probably suffice.
> 
> Correct. Opening the device using rdmav_open_device with argument 
provided 
> by
> the ULP will provide the context, which is used by subsequent calls to 
> transparently
> make use of other calls. Either Steve or I can provide the 
> rdmav_get_transport_type()
> call to return the actual device (transport) type.
> 
> > > 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.
> 
> Sure.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> - KK
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openib-general mailing list
> openib-general at openib.org
> http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
> 
> To unsubscribe, please visit 
http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
>