On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 05:08:09PM -0700, PJ Waskiewicz wrote:
> > > The patch set you refer to tried to _unify_ the port space and was
> > > rejected.  The only other alternative is to pick ephemeral ports and
> > > maintain a mapping for RDMA services.
> >
> > I thought both approaches were tried in kernel and NAK'd by
> > netdev?  This looks very similar to the 2010 patchset, except the
> > dummy socket allocation is living in userspace in this version.
> 
> This was something I presented and discussed at NetConf 2011 with
> David and other netdev core folks:
> http://vger.kernel.org/netconf2011.html.  The main issue David had
> with the original approach was the socket was being consumed by
> something else inside the kernel.  It circumvented the TCP socket
> allocation/reservation code, which was frowned upon.

If you have/can get agreement from netdev that this is acceptable then
I think it is OK from the RDMA side. It would be a good touch to CC
the netdev list with the cover letter describing this mechanism
properly, maybe referencing this discussion just so there are no
surprises.

BTW, you can purge my [email protected] email from your address book,
that hasn't worked in over 10 years..

Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to