> Quoting Roland Dreier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: Re: [PATCH RFC] sharing userspace IB objects > > > > Correct. The number of messages in flight per EEC is 1 per IB spec. > > > The fact that IB requires SQ WQEs to complete in order, even if their > > > destination is different EECs, > > > > Where's this requirement in the spec (and could this be relaxed as it > > seems like it is overly "specified") ? Just wondering... > > I don't think we want to relax the requirement that work requests > complete in order. It's hard enough to get applications correct > without having to worry about out-of-order completions,
Hmm, they seem to deal fine with this in case of SRQ. Why not here? I guess this depends on the application, but let's look at something like IPoIB or SDP: all we do when we get a send completion is look up a WR a free it. It won't be too hard to deal with out of order, either. If an app uses a pointer as WRID, it's even easier. > and I think > specifying all the corner cases would be a nightmare. Eg do we allow > successful completions after a completion with error? and so on... However, as Dror notes, the in-order requirement simply moves the complexity to hardware. Which might be one of the reasons why there are no HW implementations of RD out there. -- MST _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
