[openib-general] [PATCH 0/4] Add support for UD QPs

[Sean Hefty]

To clarify the motivation more, a question to answer is if we ignore iWarp 
completely, does it make sense to provide a higher level communication manager 
for IB.  I believe that it does, especially for userspace applications.  This 
lets us leverage existing name services, ipoib, and provides an interface that 
is simpler for most users.

A lot of existing applications and test programs exchange IB QP information over 
TCP connections, including programs that communicate using UD QPs.  If you 
compare the amount of work necessary to establish communication over an RC QP 
versus a UD QP, the difference is basically a single MAD, which isn't even 
needed.  So there's a fair amount of work that can be shared by a higher level CM.

- Sean