NOSRQ QP implementation issues (wasRe: [ofa-general] Merge window for 2.6.23 closed)

[Pradeep Satyanarayana]

Roland Dreier wrote:

> 
>  - IPoIB CM without SRQ.  Pradeep, I'm sorry this missed the window
>    but the patch quality really doesn't look up to par to me, and
>    your being in a rush to get this merged I think has actually slowed
>    things up.  I think the basic idea is OK, but I have doubts about
>    a static array as a data structure, and MST's comments about not
>    dealing with remote implementations that send packets on passive
>    connections looks quite serious as well.  I would like to close
>    this for 2.6.24 so (as above) please let's keep working this and
>    not wait for the 2.6.24 merge window.
> 

For sending (both on the active and passive side) the skbs are associated 
with the tx_qp. The remote qp for the tx_qp is the rx_qp (on the other side)
and WRs are posted to receive packets. An skb (for send) is not associated 
with SQ of the rx_qp. Therefore, no packets are expected to be sent through
the rx_qp.

In an erroneous case if packets do get sent to the wrong RQ, then they will
get dropped as no WQEs are posted. As discussed, an RNR will be returned as
expected and a new connection will get established. I still see no issues 
with this either.

If in the future, we do want to use the unused SQ and RQs, then we will have
to associate them with corresponding QP at the remote end. This will be work
for both the SRQ and non-SRQ case.

I do not see any issues. Can you please explain what is missing with this 
implementation?

Pradeep