> stackoverflow suggets:
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2974021/what-does-econnreset-mean-in-
> the-context-of-an-af-local-socket
>
> Which looks reasonable to me and matches my experience with socket
> programming on Linux. The Steven's book might have some authoritative
> clarifications
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 03:19:33PM -0700, sean.he...@intel.com wrote:
> The following behavior difference was reported between rsockets and
> sockets:
>
> when remote end is suddenly closed, recv() waiting on it receives
> tcp/ip => ECONNRESET error
> rsockets => 0 value
That isn't the whole stor
From: Sean Hefty
The following behavior difference was reported between rsockets and
sockets:
when remote end is suddenly closed, recv() waiting on it receives
tcp/ip => ECONNRESET error
rsockets => 0 value
Update rrecv() to return ECONNRESET if no data is available and
the connection is no lon
Hi Yuval-
On Oct 4, 2014, at 7:45 AM, Yuval Shaia wrote:
> This enhancement suggest the usage of IB CRC instead of CSUM in IPoIB CM.
> IPoIB Connected Mode driver uses RC (Reliable Connection) which guarantees the
> corruption free delivery of the packet.
Some naïve questions:
Is this interope
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 01:40:29PM +0300, Yuval Shaia wrote:
> > Which is exactly what we want.
> Will do, thanks.
> This is in case this code runs on bridge, right?
It covers many cases, including linux briding and routing functions,
as well as packet dumping.
I don't know if any special action
> >> @@ -1056,6 +1067,14 @@ struct ib_send_wr {
> >> intaccess_flags;
> >> struct ib_sge *prot;
> >> } sig_handover;
> >> +struct {
> >> +u64iova_start;
> >> +struct ib_indir_reg_list *
Hey Roland, please make sure these make the 3.18 merge , if they are
acceptable to you.
Thanks,
Steve.
--
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.htm
On 10/07/14 16:37, Jens Axboe wrote:
Lets do this separate, as explained last time, it needs to be evaluated
on its own and doesn't really belong in this series of patches.
Hello Jens,
A few minutes ago I have resent this patch to you with the LKML in CC. I
hope that Christoph agrees with lea
> -Original Message-
> From: linux-rdma-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-rdma-
> ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sagi Grimberg
> Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 8:18 PM
> To: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: bvanass...@acm.org; rol...@kernel.org; e...@mellanox.com;
> ogerl...@mellano
On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 04:35:00PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 04, 2014 at 04:45:47AM -0700, Yuval Shaia wrote:
>
> > + if (cm_ibcrc_as_csum)
> > + skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY;
> > +
>
> As I said before, I think this scheme should be using CHECKSUM_PARTIAL
>
10 matches
Mail list logo
