[openib-general] question related to rdma_bind_addr

[James Lentini]

On Sun, 26 Mar 2006, Or Gerlitz wrote:

> > I would find calling it rdma_bind_device() confusing. 
> 
> why? I find it very much unconfusing

I associate the word bind with bind(2). For that reason, 
rdma_bind_addr() is a good name because it is the CMA's analog for 
bind(2). Since it isn't related to bind(2), I find the name 
rdma_bind_device(dst_addr) confusing.

> > In any event, I don't find the functionality very interesting.
> 
> Hey, as i mentioned earlier in this thread, the interest came from a 
> ***possible*** enhancement to the open iscsi initiator design, now 
> being discussed, with which a transport (TCP/iSER/iSCSI offload 
> HW/etc) is asked to create its connection resources synchronously, , 
> not sure what is your interest in that.

I was speaking from my experience with NFS/RDMA. If this functionality 
is necessary for implementing iSER, I would definitely support adding 
it.