On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 05:38:27PM -0700, Sean Hefty wrote: > >When used over IB, the IP address is little more than a qualifier contained > >within the IB CM REQ private data. > > If we added support for AF_GID/AF_IB to the kernel, the rdma_cm > could leave all of the private data carried in the IB CM REQ > entirely up to the user. If the user happens to format that data to > look like the CMA header, so be it. I believe this would allow for > a 'clean' implementation of rdma_resolve_addr, preserve the ABI, and > still allow a library to provide backwards compatibility.
Yep, not sure how you handle the listening side without port conflicts?? But that doesn't seem to be a huge problem. TBH - since ACM is kinda its own little world, it could just use a seperate service ID space from RDMA CM? > The following information should be known after calling > rdma_resolve_addr: sgid, dgid, pkey, source port/sid, destination > port/sid. The address structure for AF_IB should be defined to > capture this information. (The port / service ID needs to be worked > out.) Yes, that seems great.. What API would you use to pass the PR data? What do you think of a 'rdma_get_addr_info' that could be where libacm hooks? > Would this approach combined with the ability to set the route work for > everyone? 'set the route' ? You mean the 'ip route get' thingy? Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
