On Tue, 2004-10-05 at 16:34, Sean Hefty wrote:
> >Fix endian of high tid so responses are properly matched to requests
>
> noooooooooooooooooooo.... the TID is in the MAD and goes on the wire.
> Please, do not use CPU endian!
>
> > mad_send_wr->tid = ((struct ib_mad_hdr*)
> >-
> bus_to_virt(cur_send_wr->sg_list->addr))->tid;
> >+ bus_to_virt(cur_send_wr->sg_list->addr))-
> >>tid.id;
>
> A response MAD should have exactly the same TID as what was sent. Not sure
> why we aren't matching against the entire TID.
It's only done for comparison purposes (taking the TID off the wire in
network endian and converting to CPU endian);
hi_tid = be32_to_cpu(mad->mad_hdr.tid.tid_field.hi_tid);
list_for_each_entry(entry, &port_priv->agent_list,
agent_list) { if (entry->agent.hi_tid == hi_tid)
{
...
> > if (solicited) {
> > /* Routing is based on high 32 bits of transaction ID of MAD
> >*/
> >- hi_tid = mad->mad_hdr.tid >> 32;
> >+ hi_tid = be32_to_cpu(mad->mad_hdr.tid.tid_field.hi_tid);
>
> This shouldn't be necessary:
The comparison failed when the code was without the conversion.
> Sender of request (system 1):
> mad.tid = (mad_agent.hi_tid << 32) | user_tid;
> send mad
>
> Receiver of response (system 1):
> hi_tid = mad.tid >> 32
>
> The receiver of the request should just return the same TID that it
> received.
It does.
> >+ /*
> >+ * Leave sends with timeouts on the send list
> >+ * until either matching response is received
> >+ * or timeout occurs
> >+ */
>
> FYI - this is about to change in my next patch.
>
> >+union ib_tid {
> >+ u64 id;
> >+ struct {
> >+ u32 hi_tid;
> >+ u32 lo_tid;
> >+ } tid_field;
> >+};
> >+
>
> I don't see why TID can't be u64 everywhere. We shouldn't have to make it a
> union.
-- Hal
_______________________________________________
openib-general mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
