At 07:49 PM 5/14/2008, Roland Dreier wrote: >also I wonder if it's clearer if we call this verb >ib_alloc_fast_reg_mr().
I have to disagree. Calling anything "fast" simply invites a "faster" thing to come along later. It's like calling something "new". I say call it what it is - a work-request-based, alloc-phys-buffer-list, bind-pages-to-list, to-be-widely-supported memory registration. Obviously, the individual verbs need to be a bit more precise. :-) Ralph - to answer your question who wants it, NFS/RDMA does, both client and server. I talked about requirements that it matches closely at Sonoma last month. But Steve - aren't these capable of protecting memory at byte granularity? The word "page" in some of the names implies otherwise. Tom. _______________________________________________ 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
