Quoting r. Fabian Tillier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > There are some differences in HCA behaviour with regard to > > ib_req_notify_cq. Mellanox HCAs will provide a callback/interrupt if > > the CQ is not empty at this point (in which case the poll_cq's after the > > notify are optional). > > > > However the behaviour defined in the IBTA spec indicates that > > ib_req_notify_cq will cause a callback/interrupt only on the next CQE > > which arrives, hence to be portable the poll_cq loop after > > ib_req_notify_cq is necessary to cover any CQEs which arrived between > > the prior poll and the ib_req_notify_cq. > > I remember a while ago a mention that the behavior of the Mellanox > HCAs could be controlled in the firmware, so that they would follow > the IBTA spec defined behavior.
There's a mistake here. Mellanox HCAs will generate an event upon ib_req_notify_cq only if new completions has arrived after the previous event has been reported. AFAIK this is IBTA spec compliant. -- MST _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general