Pradeep Satyanarayana wrote:
> Roland Dreier wrote:
>>  > They are not quite the same. How about:
>>  > #define CM_PACKET_SIZE (ALIGN(IPOIB_CM_MTU, PAGE_SIZE))
>>
>> That makes sense.
>>
>>  > >  > -            .event_handler = ipoib_cm_rx_event_handler,
>>  > > 
>>  > > why?  seems harmless to just leave this alone for all QPs even if an
>>  > > SRQ isn't attached.
>>  > 
>>  > If memory serves me right, I tried that and ran into some inexplicable 
>> problems.
>>  > Maybe it was hang or no traffic went through -don't exactly recollect 
>> what it was.
>>  > After this change the problem went away.
>>
>> Umm... I would like to get to the root cause of that.  Because as far
>> as I can see there is no problem if the event handler is called for a
>> non-SRQ QP.  The event will never be "last WQE reached" (since only a
>> QP attached to an SRQ can generate that) and so the event handler will
>> just return immediately and do nothing.
> 
> Since I do not recollect what the issue was it was it might require some 
> investigation 
> -especially since we have a short window for the merge. Would it be okay if I 
> submit a 
> patch without this for the merge? Subsequently I will submit a patch to 
> address this issue.
> 
> Pradeep
> 

There appears to be no problems with the 2.6.22 git tree if I leave the 
event_handler the same
for all QPs. However,  I see some ehca initialization errors with a slightly 
older kernel. 
I will work with the ehca folks (in Germany) and track this down and let you 
know.

Pradeep

_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to