> > actually the IB spec requires QPN in the work completion if either SRQ > > or base queue management extensions are supported. I'm not sure why > > though. It seems at least for current code it is fine for ehca to > > report wc->qp as NULL. > > I've update the patch in my for-2.6.21 branch to do that, and pushed > > it out. > Just want to make sure I understand this properly: > One day, if eHCA supports srq, will I have to set qp pointer with a > valid address or can I still leave it to NULL?
I though ehca hardware can't do SRQ? But anyway, the idea behind this API change is that for SRQ receive completions, then the ib_wc will have the QP pointer that the receive happened on rather than just the QPN. > Roland, you are talking about QPN. By that you mean also qp pointer? Well, I was quoting the IB spec which talks about QPN. But we're replacing that (fairly useless) info with a pointer to the actual QP, so that the consumer can get to qp_context. -R. _______________________________________________ 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