Quoting Or Gerlitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Protocols that rely on RC ACK for reliability guarantees (like SDP), > > basically > > do not make it possible to address the hca failure case: you got an ACK, but > > remote hca could have failed without committing data to memory. So APM > > failover > > is a requirement for these. It could be iser does not need APM, fine. > > This is news to me, does your HCA first sends an ACK and only then does > the DMA transaction and if needed generates the CQE !?!?!?
I can't tell either way, but why not? Consider also that DMA write is a posted transaction - HCA gets no indication when it was committed to memory, so it can not delay the ACK until this occurs. > and how come APM is the solution to this crazy problem? If HCA failure is a crazy problem, then what is the sane problem APM does *not* solve? -- 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
