[openib-general] rdma_cm.h: comment nits.

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

Quoting r. Sean Hefty <mshefty at ichips.intel.com>:
> Subject: Re: [openib-general] rdma_cm.h: comment nits.
> 
> Tom Tucker wrote:
> >>Its OK to call rdma_reject on active side as well, isn't it?
> >
> >You'll get -EINVAL on iWARP if you do this....
> 
> For IB, rdma_reject can be called on the active side if the user is 
> managing their own QP states, or is SDP.  How does iWarp support userspace 
> QPs?

BTW, Sean, could you please explain why is RESPONSE event IB-specific?
Does not it match Syn/Ack in the TCP 3-way handshake?

What I am trying to say, why are you returning ESTABLISHED on the active side at
all? Maybe we should always pass RESPONSE on active side and only pass
ESTABLISHED on passive side. TCP certainly seems to make a distinction between
these.

-- 
MST