Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 11:32:27AM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
The existing trap monitoring in Sean's module covers about 90% of the
cases in IB when you need to invalidate a PR, the last 10% will need
something new :(
Let it be. Do you think the last 10% should not prevent the local sa
merge to the upstream code?
Only that the design philosophy should accommodate an eventual solution
to this remaining problem. Mainly, as I've said, I'd like to see more
stuff in userspace and a simple well defined kernel component.
What about you? Your arguments about linking arp lifetime to PR cache
lifetime are trying to address this very same 10%.
Indeed. The argument I was trying to make is that arp cache invalidation
requires IPoIB PR cache invalidation, this handles 100% of the cases,
including the 10% not covered by doing cache invalidation based only on
IB events such as port up / sm lid change / sm reregister / etc
So far, my approach has not accepted as is by Sean and you (Roland,
Michael - would be nice to get your say here), I have to see what other
design is possible here.
Or.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
